OzBargain + Voting Reminder

hamza23 on 21/04/2016 - 16:06
Last edited 21/04/2016 - 16:10 by 1 other user
OzBargain + Voting Reminder

The OzBargain voting system is an integral part of our website. Guests and members rely on the OzBargain voting system as an indicator of a deal's worth, it is therefore imperative that we ensure that users are voting appropriately. We spend a great deal of time manually checking and implementing ‘monitoring and fraud tools’ to ensure that is happening. This forum post is about education; we want to ensure that genuine members are voting for the right reasons as we continually implement new measures to ensure this is being adhered to.

Issues we have identified:

Voting for the person
In some cases, users are voting on deals based on the name attached to the deal and not the deal itself.

Not voting for store reps
In some cases, the same deal posted by a regular user compared to a store rep can receive a substantially higher number of votes. We don’t want to punish users for correctly declaring their association or encourage sockpuppeting. Please judge the post on the deal itself and not any tag related to the deal.

Voting for the store
Users can become fans of certain stores and are excited when that store posts a new deal, so much so that they are + voting the deal before they’ve read the deal contents. Is it really a good deal?

Voting for effort
+1 for effort, a phrase that users may have seen before. We all appreciate the amazing lengths some posters go to with their deal posts and want to reward them, however by doing so we can see deals hit the front page because of the time taken to post the deal and not because of the deal itself.

Vote swapping
Some users befriend other users on OzBargain, they may feel inclined to vote on that users deal as they are an ‘online friend’ and because you always vote on each other’s deals or similar; this may not be an orchestrated thing and it may be done out of politeness. Once again we need to vote on the deal content itself.

As always: You cannot + vote a deal if you are associated with the store or product the deal is for. Furthermore, you cannot + vote a deal if you are associated with the poster (friend, family member etc). Read our sockpuppeting guidelines for more information - if you have voted on a deal you shouldn't have then please revoke your vote and contact moderators so we can rectify the situation.

Summary & Moving Forward:

Is this a big problem? No, 99%+ of votes are made genuinely. However, it is an extremely important part of OzBargain and we want to keep on top of it and stamp any issues out before they potentially develop into something more. There is regular site discussion over negative votes but little over positive votes, despite the fact in the year 2015 for example there were 743,511 positive votes made but only 6428 negative votes (that’s 1 negative vote for every 115 positive votes on average).

We’ll be making site changes throughout the year to ensure that the voting integrity on OzBargain is maintained. By this we mean visual changes, increased system measures and also continual manual checking and intervention to ensure that positive votes are being used appropriately. For users who aren’t voting appropriately, we will now action and converse with them on a case by case basis now that we have this forum topic created as a reminder to users.

Finally, we would ask the following:

  1. Please do not confront users directly about this. If you spot something, report it to moderators and we’ll take a look and action appropriately (that goes for anything you feel is suspicious, making accusations directly towards users in deal comments is not on).
  2. This isn’t directed at anyone in particular, this is something we had been discussing as early as last year and this forum topic was planned for some time this year. Should you wish to discuss this below, please do not name users and keep the discussion on topic (if you wish to discuss other site issues apart from positive voting, there are other site discussion forum topics for that).

As always, should you wish to discuss anything with us directly, you can do so via TWAM; we are happy to discuss any particular concerns with you. We appreciate all your contributions and enthusiasm towards the site.

Thanks all

Site Discussion

Comments

  • tomsco on 21/04/2016 - 16:42
    +19

    Plus one for the effort!

    • spackbace on 21/04/2016 - 17:30
      +5

      +1 coz I like you

    • tassieeagle on 21/04/2016 - 19:17
      +4

      I was going to +1 you but didn't want anyone to think we are online friends ;)

  • [Deactivated] on 21/04/2016 - 18:14
    +4

    Let's be honest - there are definitely some users here who are favoured more than others.

    It might be due to their reputation in making posts, comments or both. Plenty of these posts and comments are upvoted up to the sky (or downvoted to hell), but there's nothing that can be done about this obvious group mentality.

    I'm sure we can easily name one particular deal poster who is extremely popular, and another poster of comments who is, for loss of a better term, infamous. And that's the problem.

    Given that we can actually identify particular users by their votes and without even naming them, it sure indicates that there's an ingrained issue with the scrutiny of votes (both + and -).

    We can warn, threaten, advise and have 'courageous conversations' with as many users as practicable and appropriate, but realistically there isn't a way of conclusively proving that users are upvoting or downvoting posts and comments because of users, as opposed to the posted content.

    There's no evidence to catch a user who repeatedly - votes or + votes a particular user's comment or post, as that user could rightfully argue upon confrontation that they are voting for the content.

    in the year 2015 for example there were 743,511 positive votes made but only 6428 negative votes (that’s 1 negative vote for every 115 positive votes on average).

    OzBargain cannot blame anybody except themselves for this. The scopes of issuing negative votes are extremely limited, and for those who do issue negative votes, it can miraculously be withdrawn by the community with 6 negative comment votes.

    With the growing user base of OzBargain, this rule really needs to be looked at. Either increase the number of negative comment votes needed to withdraw a negative post vote, or scrap this system altogether. It's roughly akin to the Government not increasing the tax free threshold despite average incomes and expenses both rising.

    Users who are always negged virtually cannot make negative post votes at all.

    This is not surprising at all, and ignoring the facts won't help anybody.

    • spackbace on 21/04/2016 - 18:19
      -3

      That is definitely the most I've seen you write before KK ;)

    • Axelstrife on 21/04/2016 - 18:19
      +1

      Very much agree with this

      Neg votes for literally nothing at all.

      6 is too low with the amount of users this site has.

    • Moderatorhamza23 on 22/04/2016 - 00:17

      OzBargain cannot blame anybody except themselves for this

      The statistic about positive votes vs negative votes wasn't made to indicate there is a problem so there shouldn't be any blame. We just mentioned that statistic to illustrate that positive votes largely outweigh the negative votes and thus we thought it was about time they also got some discussion too, sorry if it didn't come across that way.

      We'll take your suggestion about negative comment votes numbers on board and have a closer look at the stats and discuss it, we have recently touched upon possibly raising the front page vote number threshold due to the increasing user base that you mentioned (something we are keeping an eye on).

      We aren't here to ignore any facts - the majority of changes on OzBargain come from community feedback which we prioritise and action as resources allow (we do take on board all feedback/suggestions made in various areas of the site).

      Thanks for your points.

      • SnoozeAndLose on 22/04/2016 - 06:50

        Mod could we have the number of revoked negative vote for us to understand the bigger picture?

      • [Deactivated] on 22/04/2016 - 22:19

        Here's an example of what I tried to imply in my previous comment:

        Posted 9 hours 8 mins ago, presently 67 votes

        Posted a full 2 hours and 29 minutes later, presently 127 votes

        Nearly identical product, nearly identical price.

        The only notable difference is that the first deal does not include an adapter. Some argue that the second deal is from a more reputable seller, but considering that the method of payment would be by card or PayPal the retailer shouldn't matter much.

        The second deal is only ONE CENT cheaper than the first.

        So, could we please explain how an adapter and a so-called "reputable seller" is worth a STAGGERING 60 more votes?

        I'm not going to believe that a one cent saving and a plastic SD adapter is worthy of 60 more votes, even if baby Jesus resurrected to tell me so.

        This is the mess that OzBargain currently is. God bless.

        • GameChanger on 22/04/2016 - 23:03
          +1

          KaptnKaos these sort of things annoy me very much, I see this on a weekly basis.

          Its reached a point where I can't tell what is a good deal until I do my own research. I have no doubt when the general public see a deal with 100+ votes they will think bargain. There was a suggestion to lift the number of votes to reach front page to 20+, but really it won't stop this occurring.

        • [Deactivated] on 22/04/2016 - 23:50
          +1

          @GameChanger:

          When I first joined OzBargain, votes attached to posts and comments actually meant something. Good deals got more votes, good comments also got more votes. Similarly, deals which weren't worthy of a 'bargain' status were either not voted on or were rightfully downvoted.

          Somewhere between then and now, the culture here has shifted immensely to that of favouritism. With more and more users joining the community here, this tendency is only becoming worse.

          The popular become more popular, and the rest go deeper and deeper into the cyber wilderness.

          Like you GC I have given up on judging deals by upvotes, and paying attention to comments based on upvotes. Nowadays, if I see a title that is either relevant or appropriate to me I will take the time to actually read the deal, read all the comments and then make up my mind as to whether that deal is good for me.

          I'm no longer inclined on upvoting or downvoting, because 1) votes have totally lost their meaning and value, and 2) I don't generally see the favour being returned, with the exception of those users who actually use their brains and don't follow the rest of the pack.

        • bluedufflecoat on 27/04/2016 - 08:49
          +1

          I didn't vote for either, but I thought it was because one deal was 1c better (hence funny) compared to the other deal.

        • cwongtech on 12/05/2016 - 11:49

          PCByte consists of MechKB and "memorycity".
          ShoppingSquare has had mixed comments about their service

          Some argue that the second deal is from a more reputable seller, but considering that the method of payment would be by card or PayPal the retailer shouldn't matter much.

          Given that the rep, Danilochan from ShoppingSquare has "Statistics 563 posts / 828 comments"
          And one of two reps francesca2148 from PCbyte has "Statistics 60 posts / 1676 comments"
          One can argue that the reps from PCbyte has a higher response rate to questions on their deals, since it seems like that's all they comment on with their rep accounts.
          Also, from personally visiting MechKB (which is where PCbyte is now located at) and multiple users also reporting the same thing, you can even check google maps if you like
          They are right next to the Australia Post Silverwater Business Hub facility.
          What this means for their customers is PCByte can use snailmail/$1 stamps but it still appears in the mailboxes of customers VERY quickly.
          Yes, the payment methods (paypal) accepted is the same, however the performance and feedback of PCbyte would be arguably higher than ShoppingSquare.
          I've had products from PCbyte turn up one day after payment before AusPost changed snailmail to the priority/we'll only deliver every two days procedure.

    • GameChanger on 22/04/2016 - 00:20

      Superb write up KaptnKaos.

      Ever since I identified the flaw in the voting system, I have refused to negative vote because it's pointless as it can be revoked by any down voted comment.

  • [Deactivated] on 21/04/2016 - 19:22

    What is your definition of too many positive votes?

    • Moderatorhamza23 on 22/04/2016 - 00:19

      I don't think there are 'too many positive votes', as long as users are voting for the right reasons then how often is up to them.

  • akd on 21/04/2016 - 20:00

    I give +1 for effort because I have seen many 2 liner deals with no description. It is good to have some description and if some one is already including price comparison, it is a bonus of making informed decision.

    • GameChanger on 22/04/2016 - 00:22
      +1

      Whilst you have done nothing wrong, its this thinking that now makes me question the integrity of the deal.

    • Moderatorhamza23 on 22/04/2016 - 00:30

      I think you are also saying that an appropriate description and/or a price comparison can help explain why it is a good deal and in turn receive more + votes than deals without such details.

      • akd on 22/04/2016 - 06:00

        Yes, Exactly.
        A good deal is not about saving money but also buying better product for long run; without wasting time to search further details. It also saves impulse buy which stays in cupboard for years. Actually that is money wasted not saved.
        I never voted to particular person but anyone with proper description and detailed information.

  • ShamelessBargains on 22/04/2016 - 00:44
    +1

    What's the deal with people revoking their positive vote? I seem to have the same people doing it to the deals I post up lately.

    ShamelessBargains on 22/04/2016 - 00:44 (Collapsed - Offtopic. Show)
    • [Deactivated] on 22/04/2016 - 22:10
      +2

      Probably to get the Revoker badge.

    • bluedufflecoat on 27/04/2016 - 08:51
      +2

      I've done it as a result of fat fingers on my phone.

      Otherwise, like the UBER deal that ended up not being a deal, I revoked my vote on that one too.

      • [Deactivated] on 27/04/2016 - 09:28

        fat fingers on my phone.

        Your phone has fingers? What phone is it?

      • ShamelessBargains on 27/04/2016 - 20:01

        I understand there is the occasional person doing it but when its the same people doing it to nearly every deal I post up, its no coincidence anymore…

        • spackbace on 27/04/2016 - 20:47

          To be fair, I only noticed it on 1 recent deal…

        • ShamelessBargains on 27/04/2016 - 21:54
          +1

          @Spackbace:

          https://www.ozbargain.com.au/node/244362
          https://www.ozbargain.com.au/node/229248

          Sorry I don't post a lot but has happened twice this year.

        • spackbace on 27/04/2016 - 22:00

          @ShamelessBargains:

          Yeah… but there's also no denying that you 2 have had your arguments. Hard to prove that 1 isn't the cause of the other.

        • GameChanger on 27/04/2016 - 23:10
          +1

          @Spackbace: Everyone has arguments, a good user would still up vote a deal if it's a bargain.

          And here is the problem where people are voting based on users.

        • spackbace on 27/04/2016 - 23:40
          -1

          @GameChanger:

          Sigh
          Did you really need to weigh in?

          Go away

        • GameChanger on 27/04/2016 - 23:45
          -2

          @Spackbace: I have neg this comment, as its not adding anything to the conversation.

          This topic interests me, so its you who needs to reconsider whether you want to comment or not.

        • spackbace on 27/04/2016 - 23:56
          +1

          @GameChanger:

          Then leave your negativity out of it. I was referring to a hypothetical, but you instead tried to use my comment to attempt to leverage your argument.

          It's like basing a fact off a fiction story.

          Learn to read what is being said and in what context, and stop soap boxing

        • GameChanger on 27/04/2016 - 23:58
          -3

          @Spackbace: Hypothetical? You wrote it like there was an argument between those users.

          Perhaps put a disclaimer on your comments that say "this is not fact"

          I can read perfectly fine, perhaps its you who needs to learn to write properly.

        • spackbace on 27/04/2016 - 23:59

          @GameChanger:

          Oh and you can't prove why a vote was withdrawn. Both of the 2 deals that have been referred to were altered from their original deal. That alone can cause someone to withdraw a vote.

        • spackbace on 28/04/2016 - 00:00
          -1

          @GameChanger:

          Hard to prove that 1 isn't the cause of the other.

          How did you think that was a factual comment? It was speculative.

        • GameChanger on 28/04/2016 - 00:00
          -3

          @Spackbace: Then why did you make the assumption the user had an argument with them!

          Also when you neg me, perhaps be transparent about it.

        • spackbace on 28/04/2016 - 00:05

          @GameChanger:

          Haven't negged any of your comments here. Cbf. I know you love the politics of comment voting. I can't be stuffed

          It's not an assumption. Those that know the members, know they argued. But that's not something to go on about now with people that weren't even part of it, or aware of it.

        • GameChanger on 28/04/2016 - 00:09
          -1

          @Spackbace: I think we have our answer right here.

          Highly unlikely that the same people would revoke their votes multiple times, unless it was personal.

        • spackbace on 28/04/2016 - 00:11

          @GameChanger:

          If you looked at the post, you'd see its 'person', not 'people'. And that person could publicly explain the (perfectly valid) reason behind it, but why should they? Why should they answer to you? Why do you even need to know?

        • GameChanger on 28/04/2016 - 00:13
          -1

          @Spackbace: I don't even need to look who it is, must be the user who you defend all the time.

          Its interesting that he is partaking in such behavior, thanks for pointing it out.

        • spackbace on 28/04/2016 - 00:16
          +1

          @GameChanger:

          No worries, I'm sure you'll use it as 'evidence' for another wild theory.

        • ShamelessBargains on 28/04/2016 - 08:04
          +1

          @Spackbace: Haha true dat. Maybe they were annoyed since I changed the Cashrewards link to ShopandMint. ShopandMint have a higher eBay cashback rate so I thought it would benefit members more.

        • spackbace on 28/04/2016 - 10:19
          +2

          @ShamelessBargains:

          I really wouldn't get too hung up on the withdrawn vote/s :)

  • [Deactivated] on 22/04/2016 - 09:55
    +1

    the voting system on ozb is a joke. i don't take any notice of the voting because of how flawed the system is.

    • GameChanger on 22/04/2016 - 20:23
      +2

      Yep some users can certainly put anything out and it will get mindlessly up voted.

      A review is in the pipelines so who knows we may see a change.

  • Moderatorhamza23 on 07/05/2016 - 13:00

    Should you wish to discuss this below, please do not name users and keep the discussion on topic (if you wish to discuss other site issues apart from positive voting, there are other site discussion forum topics for that)

    We made it quite clear that we should not be naming users or discuss other topics, somehow we are now discussing external websites and their internal tracking system. If you have a problem with a website, contact them directly, post within the relevant forum post for that website/issue or don't use that website anymore (common sense). If it's not worth your time chasing it up then it shouldn't be worth your time commenting about it in an unrelated OzBargain threads, it gives the impression that some users are masking their personal issues as site issues and similar.

    This thread is about the proper use of positive votes, this is a final warning - any subsequent off topic posts will result in further action. Move on.

    Thanks

  • dan76n on 07/05/2016 - 13:44

    I'm ok with deals spiking from + votes as I can work out myself if it's actually a good deal most of the time.
    I get more annoyed when a deal doesn't get + votes but has 100's of clicks and when you click on it half of it is sold out.
    I'd like to see a scenario where users need to be signed in to go through to the deal. Maybe even a scenario where you must vote once you follow a link. (Introduce a neutral vote to keep it balanced.)

    • cwongtech on 12/05/2016 - 11:53

      I'd like to see a scenario where users need to be signed in to go through to the deal. Maybe even a scenario where you must vote once you follow a link. (Introduce a neutral vote to keep it balanced.)

      This could potentially cause some annoyance to guests of OzBargain as well as active members who for some reason are logged out (maybe on a different mobile device), which could result in lowered ad revenue for OzBargain.

      • dan76n on 12/05/2016 - 13:41

        Potentially yes but it would certainly increase the registered members.

        • cwongtech on 12/05/2016 - 13:51

          It would certainly convert regulars that don't have an account, however for first time visitors it may be a "barrier" to them.
          By the way, registered members can opt-out of ads, due to the mass amount of unregistered members visiting the site.
          The ad revenue alone is enough to sustain OzBargain.

          I'd like to see a scenario where users need to be signed in to go through to the deal.

          There are plenty of perks to a registered user already, ad-free browsing, ability to add your own referral links to the random-pool of referral links (if available).

  • hawkers8905 on 18/10/2017 - 10:13
    +1

    Sorry to dig up this old thread but a recent deal made me search for the voting guidelines and I stumbled upon this post and got distracted reading it…

    I agree with KaptKaos above in terms of some users getting + voted to the max and equally some users getting - voted to the max in the comments, and we all know who they both are.

    Just a suggestion, but perhaps a similar voting system as eBay use for feedback might be better suited to OzBargain???

    I have no idea what the categories could be but an example could be;

    The Seller (e.g JB Hi Fi, use this for good cust service, postage speed, good dispute resolution): 1-5
    The Deal Poster (e.g You know who, use this for reliability, effort etc): 1-5
    The Bargain (e.g 20% OFF): 1-5
    The Product (e.g An Ipad, use this to rate how good a product is, bit like Product Review website): 1-5

    That way, users can look at the score and see if a deal is highly rated because of the seller, the deal, the item etc and come to their own conclusions.

    • scotty on 18/10/2017 - 10:47

      Star rating of 1-5 only gives you the quality (when you average out all the votes) but not the quantity (how many people participated). Obviously we could include the Amazon style rating with chart — xxx people voted 5, yyy people voted 4, etc. However I think it's unnecessarily complicating things. For now — two values (+1 & -1) with the quantity would do.

      As of voting on users — we have that in beta for ages. Turn it on in your settings page under "Show user rating widget". Just that we have not done anything with the data. Maybe we should. We could also add the same 5-star rating to sellers / merchants.

    • nocure on 18/10/2017 - 11:12

      users getting + voted to the max…

      Because their deals are always of the highest quality.

      users getting - voted to the max in the comments and we all know who they both are.

      Because their comments are always of the lowest quality.

      The voting system works perfectly.

Login or Join to leave a comment
Login Join