View Topic

I suppose, though now it wouldn't work unless they were logged in as somebody.

But the question is who has the Comp Sci skills and the motive to do that.  I mean, last time I checked Mathyland didn't have any enemies—especially enemies willing to go through and write a program to "double like" anything.

That's the confusing thing.  Why would anyone go through the trouble to make someone else look like they were double liking something?  If they wanted to make someone look suspicious for something, that's a pretty small, unusual thing to do.

Ah, but is it small, though? It creates so much work for Wintermoot that it's already resulted in a first and final warning.

I really don't know how these double likes happened. I'm so confused. I wouldn't even know the first thing about how to do that. I completely understand why your accusation makes sense, and I just want to figure out why this happened and show that I'm being honest. I know I can't prove my innocence, but I hope you can take my word for it that I didn't do it.

I think someone somehow framing me on every single post I like is unlikely too, so maybe it really is some kind of weird bug.

I still don't see the motive in it, or how it's bug abuse. There wouldn't be a point in giving a few people one extra karma. Bug abuse would be like using it to like your own post multiple time, and I don't like my own posts.

Well I mean, a bug is a bug.  If it's being exploited to an extent, regardless of the type, it's bug abuse...since rather than reporting it the first time, it's something that's still being exploited.

Well I mean, a bug is a bug.  If it's being exploited to an extent, regardless of the type, it's bug abuse...since rather than reporting it the first time, it's something that's still being exploited.

You're right. To be honest, I forgot that it happens, and I thought it only happened once. Someone pointed it out, and I forgot about it since then.

Is it possible to rollback the fix then have Mathyland reproduce it under controlled conditions?
Also do you have any record of the IP address that issued both requests?

Is it possible to rollback the fix then have Mathyland reproduce it under controlled conditions?
Also do you have any record of the IP address that issued both requests?

I would rather not roll back a fix, since it seems certain the issue has been resolved and I really don't think it's as big a deal as people seem to think it is. I would have to go through the activity log to get the IP address...the karma and notification logs contain the account IDs, but no IP addresses.

Just interested in clearing Mathyland's name if it can be. Him exploiting the bug is not the only possible explanation for the issues. I could make a web page and if anyone visited it they would upvote this post if they were logged into Wintreath, and the same could be done before the fix for any post as a guest user.

Though I don't really even need to go that far.....

(removed, because it was actually working)

But would anyone really go through the trouble of doing something like that just to frame a new member? I highly doubt it, not to mention that if you did something like that it wouldn't only effect one person.

I understand that people want an absolute answer here, but again, I feel the evidence is very strong here and to be honest I don't feel the need to spend more time confirming what I feel is already confirmed in the evidence when nobody is at risk of being banned or otherwise disciplined. At the risk of sounding self-centered, the only thing that's been lost to this issue the time it's taken/will take to clear effected members and posts, and I'd rather not throw more time into it unnecessarily.

I can think of a few petty individuals in NationStates who'd do this type of thing to a new member just to annoy you. I feel like we're jumping to conclusions way too soon. Especially since the motive here is truly incredibly weak for Mathyland to do it.

Spite, though? People go out of their way to spite people every day.

I'd prefer not to let the matter rest, because if Mathyland didn't do this, then we've unnecessarily given him/her (still not paying attention ) grief, and I'd like to be able apologise.

And I'd rather not have that warning there, as I'm worried it could affect me in elections.

him/her

Him

What you're trying to say is that someone trailed him, found every post he liked within minutes of him liking them, and exploited a fairly obscure and convoluted bug just on posts that he and only he liked to spite...him? Me?

You'll excuse me if I feel like we've jumped into full-blown conspiracy theory territory here, and if I find the prospect of spending hours to debunk conspiracy theories and 'confirm' what the evidence already strongly confirms is less than appealing.

I truly don't understand why you're so opposed to researching it further. And I especially don't like that you're so defensive about this. This is getting dangerously close to more passive aggressive sniping.

As Eve pointed out, even guests could have done it previously.

Hell, I feel like we're far too quick to dismiss the possibility that this was a bug, too. I know literally nothing about programming, but I'm thinking that as an investigative matter, this isn't being investigated fully.

It is fairly premature to hand out final warnings for something that hasn't conclusively been proven to be an offence to begin with.

If you did do this, though, Mathy, I would prefer it if you come clean about this right now. It will save everyone a lot of headaches, including yourself.

EDIT: Pretty much, even if this is Mathy, I'd like it to be proven fully, since I'm at a complete loss as to why someone would go to all that trouble to increase someone else's karma, not even their own. Even there, the only motive I could see is that it would annoy the community/Moot himself. And that would beg the question: why? Just to be a random troll?

Curiosity is a wonderful thing.

EDIT 2: To be honest, I would much rather all of this be dealt with absolutely. I'd like to know Mathy's true nature going forward. If this is a bug, then obviously, that's the end. If this is Mathy, I'd like to know now to decide exactly how much trust I'd like to place in a new member, and if it's someone else, I'd like to know who, and then why. Why would I like to know these things? Curiosity at best, I expect. But what if we actually learn something important/interesting? Why not avail ourselves of the opportunity?