Beefy Boxes and Bandwidth Generously Provided by pair Networks
Pathologically Eclectic Rubbish Lister
 
PerlMonks  

RE: (2) Reputation Viewing Option?

by ybiC (Prior)
on Aug 30, 2000 at 20:29 UTC ( #30325=note: print w/ replies, xml ) Need Help??


in reply to RE: Reputation Viewing Option?
in thread Reputation Viewing Option?

I also had the same thought a while back, brother Boogman, but have since changed my mind.

If a Monk Gone BadTM wanted to stalk someone, it could be done using "neutral" votes, such as you describe.

It's sad, but the Monastery has grown enough that such things do need to be considered.   That, or I forgot to take my meds today and am having paranoid delusions.   :^P   (just joking about meds, but not about the chance that I'm way off base in my thinking on this.)

Update : a number of fine Monks have pointed out why this is highly unlikely, and I have no reason to doubt them.   Not the first ybiC-brain-hiccup, certainly not the last.   ;^)
    cheers,
    ybiC


Comment on RE: (2) Reputation Viewing Option?
RE: RE: (2) Reputation Viewing Option?
by Boogman (Scribe) on Aug 30, 2000 at 20:38 UTC
    I'm kind of curious what you mean by stalking someone. I would think this would actually help with the Monk Gone Bad situation, cause one of the things you hear people complaining a lot about is people voting -- on all of a certain persons posts. Any nodes that had been abstained on in the past would be unavailable for this sort of attack. Plus if someone wanted to see the reps of the other monks, they still can as it stands now, they would just be changing the reps of the posts as they did so.
      I'll grant that it's a bit of a stretch, but...

      if the hypothetical Monk Gone BadTM created dummy monk id's and used their neutral votes to discover reps of victim's posts, the Monk Gone BadTM could then apply his/her real votes to selectively -- nodes.

      This isn't something I've thought through or analyzed, so if there are holes in the logic, feel free to bring them to light.   On the other hand, I hesitate to publicly discuss such stuff, to avoid giving anyone bad ideas.

      Update : a number of fine Monks have pointed out why this is highly unlikely, and I have no reason to doubt them.   Not the first ybiC-brain-hiccup, certainly not the last.   ;^)
          cheers,
          ybiC

        That's a lot of trouble to go to to -- somebody. I don't think what you're describing is likely to happen. Also if I really wanted to -- somebody, then I would create another users and -- them with both, why mess about with abstentions when the object is obviously to "take them down a peg or two"?

        Nuance

        Well the monk wouldn't be able to use this option until they had votes to give, so they'd have to get that dummy monk some experience first which would make that sort of thing harder. I think the main problem with dummy monks is that it allows for the user to vote -- on the same post more than once. I would think, if someone had evil intentions, this is what they would do instead. Making the neutral vote use up a vote as tye suggested would make the user have to build their dummy monk up pretty high before it became any use, although I personally think it would be better to have it not use up a vote.
RE (tilly) 3 (stalking): Reputation Viewing Option?
by tilly (Archbishop) on Aug 30, 2000 at 21:20 UTC
    Why go through that effort to be a little more effective?

    Any potential target prominent enough to "be stalked" is likely to get plenty of experience anyways. It is the knowledge that someone is POed but unwilling to discuss it that is the issue, not the experience.

Log In?
Username:
Password:

What's my password?
Create A New User
Node Status?
node history
Node Type: note [id://30325]
help
Chatterbox?
and the web crawler heard nothing...

How do I use this? | Other CB clients
Other Users?
Others meditating upon the Monastery: (6)
As of 2014-10-22 10:26 GMT
Sections?
Information?
Find Nodes?
Leftovers?
    Voting Booth?

    For retirement, I am banking on:










    Results (114 votes), past polls