Beefy Boxes and Bandwidth Generously Provided by pair Networks
Syntactic Confectionery Delight
 
PerlMonks  

Re^2: Could vote multiple times in voting booth (shock)

by atemon (Chaplain)
on Oct 19, 2007 at 14:54 UTC ( [id://645992]=note: print w/replies, xml ) Need Help??


in reply to Re: Could vote multiple times in voting booth (shock)
in thread Could vote multiple times in voting booth

Hi, thanks for the reply and considering this seriously.

This is a problem faced by all sites which uses IP to track users. Consider the case of rapidshare. They give the limit of some 100MB size. They use IP address to track. The effect is if either of us in the office downloads some file, it affects the downloads by others :(

A possible solution can be, track both IP and user. I.e. if user is Anonymous,check IP. For all other users, look for user ID. A possible truth-table which allows anonymous user and one vote per a logged-in user can be

+---------------+-------------+-------+------------------------------- +--------+ | IP Address | User | Vote | Comments + | +---------------+-------------+-------+------------------------------- +--------+ | 192.168.1.10 | vcTheGuru | Y | 1st Vote by vcTheGuru + | | 192.168.1.10 | Anonymous | Y | 1st vote by vcTheGuru, without + login | | 192.168.1.10 | tye | Y | 1st Vote by tye + | | 192.168.1.10 | Anonymous | N | 2nd vote by Anonymous from sam +e IP. | | | | | + | | 192.168.1.11 | vcTheGuru | N | 2nd Vote by vcTheGuru + | | 192.168.1.11 | Anonymous | Y | 3rd Vote by vcTheGuru,New IP-A +nonymous| | 192.168.1.11 | tye | N | 2nd Vote by tye + | +---------------+-------------+-------+------------------------------- +--------+
It is obvious that Anonymous user can vote from any IP. Otherwise there no meaning in allowing anonymous user to vote. If someone wish, he can cheat the on-line voting. I feel like none of the method is fool-proof someone wish to screw up any voting :(

--VC

My Home

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^3: Could vote multiple times in voting booth (shock)
by almut (Canon) on Oct 19, 2007 at 16:00 UTC
    ... If someone wish, he can cheat the on-line voting.

    It's not like we were having an election for PM's President, or some such... :)  I always thought of these polls as being for entertainment only, and to provide some context for funny, wise or witty remarks, which all in all just helps to get to know each other a little better, and gives some rough feedback what "the community" thinks.

    I've personally never felt the urge to vote more than once, except maybe if I couldn't decide on which option to vote. And even then, I just picked one and went on with life.  I'd suppose the majority of Monks are handling this in a similar way (?)

Re^3: Could vote multiple times in voting booth (shock)
by ikegami (Patriarch) on Oct 19, 2007 at 15:25 UTC

    How does that help any? Everyone can now vote more often than before! The majority of people currently have one vote, but you just gave them a second vote.

    If I'd make a change, it would be to give the following results:

    +--------------+-----------+------+--------------------------------+ | IP Address | User | Vote | Comments | +--------------+-----------+------+--------------------------------+ | 192.168.1.10 | vcTheGuru | Y | First instance of IP and user. | | 192.168.1.10 | Anonymous | N | IP already voted. | | 192.168.1.10 | tye | N | IP already voted. | | 192.168.1.10 | Anonymous | N | IP already voted. | | 192.168.1.11 | vcTheGuru | N * | User already voted. | | 192.168.1.11 | Anonymous | Y | First instance of IP and user. | | 192.168.1.11 | tye | N | IP already voted. | +--------------+-----------+------+--------------------------------+

    The * marks the only change from the current setup.

    However, the gains from this change are *very* minor: It would force the "cheat" to logout to place any vote after the first. It won't stop him from placing as many votes as he has IP addresses. It's not worth the effort.

      Congratulations, you two have come up with two of the four "solutions" I came up with long ago. One makes things a bit fairer for people behind a firewall with a shared public IP address while doubling the chances for repeated voting for the most typical situations. The other does the best job of reducing repeat voting (but is still trivially worked around and so doesn't improve the current situationn all that much).

      So neither is much if any of an over-all net improvement. Hence, I don't see much point in spending resources to implement either.

      For the record, describing all five options in terms of how the code would work rather than via an example chronology:

      Current method. You can't vote if:

      • Someone has already voted from your IP address

      First proposal above (by vcTheGuru). You can't vote if any of the following are true:

      • You aren't anonymous and have already voted under this user ID
      • You are anonymous and someone has already voted anonymously from your IP address.

      Second proposal above (by ikegami). You can't vote if any of the following are true:

      • You aren't anonymous and have already voted under this user ID
      • Someone has already voted from your IP address

      The proposal I first seriously considered long ago. You can't vote if any of the following are true:

      • You aren't anonymous and have already voted under this user ID
      • You are anonymous and somebody (anonymous or otherwise) has already voted from your IP address

      The second proposal I considered long ago. You can't vote if any of the following are true:

      • You aren't anonymous and have already voted under this user ID
      • You are anonymous and somebody (anonymous or otherwise) has already voted from your IP address
      • You aren't anonymous and somebody has already voted anonymously from your IP address

      I personally think that the last one is the best of the bunch. But it still doesn't reduce the number of duplicate votes that anyone can cast. It is a bit "fairer" for people sharing a public IP address, but then most people have another public IP address that they don't share (at least not with the same people), especially if they go slightly out of their way. So, when you consider that this is just about rather silly polls and people can still reply to them, it never became a priority to me to thrash the DB design and rewrite the "deal with poll votes" code (which isn't just "one place", FYI).

      Oh, vcTheGuru wrote:

      Hi, thanks for the reply and considering this seriously.

      Well, I hope this reply does show that I had already considered this seriously (if, in fact, only briefly). For the record (just in case you didn't notice), my previous reply was a bit sarcastic. In particular "this is our highest priority" was irony. Other parts contained sarcasm as well but I was sincere in noting that you hadn't demonstrated that you had considered all of the possibilities. And I am glad that you did follow through on that point.

      The other part nobody has yet mentioned is voting on previous polls. Something that is also not worth "fixing", IMHO (it isn't, strictly speaking, "broken" and you can't really "fix" it completely either, but there could certainly be improvements made on some fronts but not without trade-offs that are too expensive on other fronts).

      - tye        

Re^3: Could vote multiple times in voting booth (shock)
by eric256 (Parson) on Oct 19, 2007 at 15:22 UTC

    "I feel like none of the method is fool-proof someone wish to screw up any voting :(" ding ding ding we have a winner! ;)

    The only way to "fix" this is to disallow anony votes which wouldn't be very nice so, oh well.


    ___________
    Eric Hodges
A reply falls below the community's threshold of quality. You may see it by logging in.

Log In?
Username:
Password:

What's my password?
Create A New User
Domain Nodelet?
Node Status?
node history
Node Type: note [id://645992]
help
Chatterbox?
and the web crawler heard nothing...

How do I use this?Last hourOther CB clients
Other Users?
Others admiring the Monastery: (3)
As of 2024-03-29 06:15 GMT
Sections?
Information?
Find Nodes?
Leftovers?
    Voting Booth?

    No recent polls found