Re: rating manipulations on www.vim.org have taken place

Excerpts from Benjamin R. Haskell's message of Fri Nov 25 04:52:14 +0100 2011:
> That's what you could do if you're assuming that the ratings are for the
> benefit of the plugin authors. I'd rather the ratings be useful for
> users.
Let me explain it to you: Its plugin author writing scripts.
Thus its plugin authors serving the needs of users.
If you setup a simple efficient feedback loops (the way github does)
you'll get nice system moving forward improving on its own.

Its like telling to babyies: "You're not useful to me - so I don't even
try to teach you standing up and how to walk."
You don't see that it's children serving your needs when you're old
(unless you suicide). From this example its easy to understand that
"little boys/girls" need guidance to be helpfull to the community.

That's my understanding about open source.

> without leaving a comment, they'll likely not leave a rating.
Then they don't understand feedback loops. Then they should not vote.
Becaues its *you* benefting as user if you read "downvoting because
script-id 326 gets the job done much better".

> > Its ok to downvote for a reason such as "contains executable".
> > But its bad to have people provide negative rating and not knowing why!
> > The website should allow some minimal feedback.
> Allow? Yes, great idea. Force? No.
I agree its debatable. Why do I prefer comments? Because I can validate and
proof them. I can't judge votings without comments - so I surely am in favour
of forcing comments.

> He wrote a message stating it was fixed on Sept. 2.
I've found the followings scripts which got dowvoted after Sept. 2.
I searched for scripts having 10 or more down votings in sequence since Sept. 2.

SCRIPT_ID / downvote count / time range
3695 / 40 (2011-10-23 from 09:09 till 09:23)
2140 / 117 (2011-10-29 01:34:49 - 2011-10-29 02:07:53)
1435 / 100 (2011-10-23 08:28:59 - 2011-10-23 10:05:42)
670 / 17 (2011-10-23 09:05:14 - 2011-10-23 09:09:59)
294 / 191 (2011-10-23 07:43:33 - 2011-10-23 11:43:03)
122 / 134 (2011-10-23 08:22:55 - 2011-10-23 09:07:22 )

SCRIPT_ID / NAME (AUTHOR) => voting result

3695: commentary.vim : Comment stuff out; takes a motion as a target (Tim Pope) => 28/103
2140: xoria256.vim : Soft pastel gamma on dark background, same appearence in {,g}vim (Dmitriy Zotikov) => 249/245
1435: HiMtchBrkt : withdrawn (Charles Campbell) => -36/131,
670: VisIncr : Produce increasing/decreasing columns of numbers, dates, or daynames (Charles Campbell) => 785/648
294: Align : Help folks to align text, eqns, declarations, tables, etc (Charles Campbell) => 1452/712
122: Astronaut (Charles Campbell) => -57/169

4 times Charles Campbell
1 time Tim Pope
1 time Dmitriy Zotikov

comment: I cleaned up commentary Aug 20 21:07:23 2011 so it happened again.
As example I attached relevant data for 3695, see below. And even for
www.vim.org I can't believe users voting the same plugins every 4 secs?

If Bram fixed the issue on Sept 2. then its very likely that someone wrote a
script or some other magic is going on I can't imagine - maybe search engines
do follow forms as well? If so why didn't it happen more often?

http://googlewebmastercentral.blogspot.com/2008/04/crawling-through-html-forms.html
.. says it may happen and might have happened in the past.
A fix would be robots.txt for google if this was the case.
But then - why should google bot run that many queries if there are 3 options only ?!
Doesn't make sense to me. Passing invalid data to web apps will yield "internal
server errors" very often.

Additionally the following plugins still have 20 down votes in sequence within 6 hours:

515|2008-04-04 00:22:44|2008-04-04 00:26:00
2002|2008-04-04 00:40:53|2008-04-04 00:45:16

SCRIPT: USER
| python_fold | wiersma |
| python_ifold | hellhound |

Marc Weber

Sample data for script id 3695:

TWO RELEASES
+---------------------+
| creation_date |
+---------------------+
| 2011-08-20 16:57:40 |
| 2011-08-28 03:20:10 |
+---------------------+

is not related to votings IMHO:

ID | VOTING | DATE
3695 1 2011-09-23 19:06:32
3695 4 2011-10-21 03:48:14
3695 -1 2011-10-23 09:09:23
3695 -1 2011-10-23 09:09:24
3695 -1 2011-10-23 09:09:26
3695 -1 2011-10-23 09:09:30
3695 -1 2011-10-23 09:11:30
3695 -1 2011-10-23 09:11:52
3695 -1 2011-10-23 09:12:34
3695 -1 2011-10-23 09:12:42
3695 -1 2011-10-23 09:12:51
3695 -1 2011-10-23 09:12:59
3695 -1 2011-10-23 09:13:46
3695 -1 2011-10-23 09:14:13
3695 -1 2011-10-23 09:14:22
3695 -1 2011-10-23 09:14:29
3695 -1 2011-10-23 09:14:43
3695 -1 2011-10-23 09:14:49
3695 -1 2011-10-23 09:15:46
3695 -1 2011-10-23 09:16:10
3695 -1 2011-10-23 09:16:20
3695 -1 2011-10-23 09:17:38
3695 -1 2011-10-23 09:18:42
3695 -1 2011-10-23 09:19:00
3695 -1 2011-10-23 09:19:18
3695 -1 2011-10-23 09:19:32
3695 -1 2011-10-23 09:19:48
3695 -1 2011-10-23 09:21:01
3695 -1 2011-10-23 09:21:31
3695 -1 2011-10-23 09:21:38
3695 -1 2011-10-23 09:21:49
3695 -1 2011-10-23 09:21:55
3695 -1 2011-10-23 09:22:03
3695 -1 2011-10-23 09:22:12
3695 -1 2011-10-23 09:22:20
3695 -1 2011-10-23 09:22:32
3695 -1 2011-10-23 09:22:38
3695 -1 2011-10-23 09:22:43
3695 -1 2011-10-23 09:22:50
3695 -1 2011-10-23 09:23:27
3695 -1 2011-10-23 09:23:33
3695 -1 2011-10-23 09:23:40
3695 4 2011-10-27 18:08:25
3695 1 2011-11-21 13:48:30
3695 4 2011-11-22 14:45:56

--
You received this message from the "vim_use" maillist.
Do not top-post! Type your reply below the text you are replying to.
For more information, visit http://www.vim.org/maillist.php