Check this guy out, he's going around posting negative votes for all the top deals so that they can win. For example:
http://www.ozbargain.com.au/node/4508
Which CLEARLY isn't expired, and either way why should a deal be voted negative if it has expired? (ie, http://www.ozbargain.com.au/node/4530)
(Edited by scotty — moved to Announcement and Feedback forum)
Ha. Looks like someone is very desperated to get the prize tomorrow.
Knowing you Scotty - that won't happen!
Anyway, we need to do something about it because this has happened before?
It sorta sucks, I'm just furious that people are ruining other people's chances.
This is the one thing that sucks with a community based site like this, everything else is just amazing.
THis is gettign ridiculous. Scotty you must do something about the negative feedback system.
You are the one being ridiculous. Do you want your IP banned again (as well as your other friends?)
look your negative feedback system isn't working.
Is it not working or are you just abusing it?
you just got to have tougher rules about the negative voting
you know more restrictions, only a certain amount of negative feedback maybe (5 negative feedback per month)
Why not make 2 negative votes equal 1 positive, that stops the stacking?? Ironic but osim has another point - limit the number of negative votes in a period, although I would have thought commonsense would mean this shouldn't be necessary
We wouldn't have to if people would respect the site.
i am not abusing the system, we just got to have tougher rules
No offense osim, but you are. I've seen you voting negatives for other offers with trivial reasons, but you get defensive when people do it on yours.
Example:
http://www.ozbargain.com.au/node/4602 - you voted negative just because free $10 voucher is too little?
and yet,
http://www.ozbargain.com.au/node/4556 - you get defensive when someone said 7ml is too little.
Very contradicting.
i am just giving suggestion , to make this website a better place
exactly we should limit the amount of negative feedbacks
Scotty, maybe you can implement a member voting system too. i.e. something like Whirlpool's aura system. :) XX negative votes and they're automatically suspended from voting/posting new stuff. Then it's up to you to manually review them and impose a permanent ban. :)
Does Whirlpool's aura system automatically bans a person? Maybe I haven't trolled enough there to find out :) I'll put that on my todo…
I'm not sure about a ban, but that gives you some idea of what you could possible do. Also keeps your job simpler. Letting majority of the members preventing abuse of the website can be potentially effective. :)
Whirlpool's aura system has no formal effect on users (other than that a certain level must be possessed for a user to access "The Pool Room" sub-forum). Aura simply reflects other users' opinions of a person - and it isn't even shown by default; only your vote of a person is shown next to their username.
Aura is an entertaining oddity but I don't think OzBargain needs a similar system or "Aura on steroids". The moderators have powers for a reason.
Some merit to that, maybe a flag to the mods/scotty so that he or we can turnoff someone's ability to make negative votes for a while, that is we look at the comments and see if they have another purpose in mind. That way they can still make comments just not influence the voting.
Exactly, suspending voting would suffice, not comments. Actually, I think suspend them from posting new offers would also be a good idea, given that there have been way too many spam-style posts recently. Not naming any names, but this appears to be the case with repeated daily offers of some sites. Each time the deal is repeated, a new post is created.
With "spams", we already have the ability to ban the entire domain which is much more effective than banning a specific individual, as they can always create another account.
Now we could implement something that automatically bans a domain for a period of time, if it gets too many negative votes (over a specific period of time again).
I don't think the Whirlpool Aura system bans people. If you get enough Aura, you get access to the The Pool Room (TPR). TPR is the basically any offtopic discussions.
That makes no sense osim, you are a great contributor but you think giving negative votes for false reasons is OK? Surely starting a discussion would be more productive.
firstly thank you neil. I don't think i am giving negative votes for flase reasons. I think I have the right to warn someone if the deal is bad.
Everyone have a different point of view towards different issues.
How can you have a point of view that an offer is expired when it's not expired? And why do you need to warn someone something is expired when it clearly says EXPIRED?
well the deal didn't work for me so it must be expired.
@osim: Please have a read of ozpete's note, specifically "If its no longer available, a comment should suffice, then a moderator like Jeffery, Scotty or I can change the posting. Or the original poster can do that. So leave the moderating to the mods"
< SNIP >
As for voting negative on an expired deal, that really isn’t necessary.
If say you suspect there was no stock ever then thats different matter. But be careful please. Negative votes not justified can deter people from posting a deal, just like no votes do. If I find a posting gets no votes for a particular item, I’ll probably say people here aren’t interested and wont post something similar again. Likewise a lot of positives tells me that this is something people here value and I’ll share similar again.
Also a deal one week may not be a deal next week as a competitive offer now exists. Is your negative vote appropriate as it was a good deal originally. Likewise it may draw out comments from others on better offers, so that helps us all.
If a deal is expired and the mods or original poster dont update the posting after a reasonable time, then a negative vote might be appropriate. Then a comment like “its expired 3 days ago” and a -ve vote, would be appropriate.
All the above is MY personal opinion, not official OZb policy.
by the way have you guys seen what 'Rhys" comment on my post http://www.ozbargain.com.au/node/4556 he gave me a negative feedback because the freebie is too small. Come on a freebie is free, and he is complaining about the size. I don't see you guys complain about it.
osim, this is a community and frankly if you are upsetting people with your actions, if i wasn't a moderator, I probably would have gone thru all your posts and made a dumb negative comment as well, just to give you a message, like Rhys might have done - but that's a guess on my behalf.
we want to encourage deals not put people off. Look at the post I made about the 4gb usb drives, that's encouraged Dan to come up with a better deal, one that he makes some money on, and we make a saving, so we all gain - an NO negative vote was needed.
Too wrongs don't make a right mate, don't try and put all the blame on somebody else.
Miccas point taken - and it was wrong of me to assume why Rhy's voted the way he did - I have edited my post
Sorry man, that was actually directed at osim.
But yeah, it would be pointless for ANYONE to go around posting like that, let alone one person (osim).
It's a pity that scotty puts money into this and we have a few people who want to put other deals down because they want theirs to win. In the end, if your deal is good enough then it will win. There is no point in cheating.
That's true and that's definitely not worth a -. How can one complain if its free?
But respond to the Jeans West deal
http://www.ozbargain.com.au/node/4602
You say expired then say..it's not enough?
IMO, we should take out the weekly prizes. I mean we are bargain hunters so its tempting to do anything for a freebie.
http://www.ozbargain.com.au/node/4602
"The voucher doesn’t work."
then
"$10 is too little."
I would love to see if you even tried.. let me guess, no?
But he's very desperated for $20! :)
Yep, he did the same to the Jeans West Discount which is clearly not expired.
http://www.ozbargain.com.au/node/4602