Scoop -- the swiss army chainsaw of content management
Front Page · Everything · News · Code · Help! · Wishlist · Project · Scoop Sites · Dev Notes · Latest CVS changes · Development Activities
Interesting article attack strategy Bugs
By Mararet Thatcher , Section New Scoop Sites []
Posted on Mon Apr 29, 2002 at 12:00:00 PM PST
On Kuro5hin, user Lonesome Cowboy Ernie takes credit for causing user Lonesome Cowboy Burt's story On Catholicism part IV to tank.

If Lonesome Cowboy Ernie's comment is to be believed, Ernie crapflooded Burt's story. The resulting hail of 0 rated rated comments caused Burt's story to be wiped from the queue after the thirty-six hour holding period.

If that isn't a clever abuse of the system, I'm not certain what is. I'm not going to clamor for an instant fix, but this ought to cause some thought for the next time the queue is reworked.

< Come get your fresh Chron | Strategies for SubSections >

Menu
· create account
· faq
· search
· report bugs
· Scoop Administrators Guide
· Scoop Box Exchange

Login
Make a new account
Username:
Password:

Related Links
· Kuro5hin
· Lonesome Cowboy Ernie
· Lonesome Cowboy Burt
· On Catholicism part IV
· Lonesome Cowboy Ernie's comment
· More on Bugs
· Also by Mararet Thatcher

Story Views
  62 Scoop users have viewed this story.

Display: Sort:
Interesting article attack strategy | 10 comments (10 topical, 0 hidden)
Not very clever (5.00 / 2) (#1)
by hurstdog on Mon Apr 29, 2002 at 08:35:43 PM PST

We knew it was possible. What can we do other than delete the comments though? We don't have the time to go through and find all of these accounts and delete them... personally I just wish they would take it somewhere else.



-hurstdog


What should happen... (5.00 / 2) (#4)
by dram on Tue Apr 30, 2002 at 04:12:37 PM PST

Is that we should make it so you can only post editoral comments when a story is in the queue, not topical ones. Then we should disallow comment ratings on editorial comments. At least that's what I think.

-dram
[Ingenuitas.org]



Discussion Quality (5.00 / 3) (#5)
by The Trinidad Kid on Wed May 01, 2002 at 06:49:23 AM PST

If a story hangs around on the queue a decision is taken on the basis of the quality of the discussion as to whether it is posted or dumped.

Hidden comments are not part of the discussion - they are hidden - they shouldn't count toward the quality metric...

Lonesome Cowboy Ernie used rubbish comments to reduce the quality of the discussion - he also used wildly offensive (hidden) posts like this:
Wherever Vlad treads, anal faggotry abounds.

I wrote a song about it.

THE ANAL RAPE SONG

Anal rape is a good thing
Anal rape is a good thing
Anal rape is a good thing
This thing I know is true!

It's good for you;
It's good for me;
It's good for the economy!

Anal Rape!

Announcer: Anal rape. Try it today. Available at a prison or bathouse near you. Operators are standing by. Try it TODAY!!!

The major problem is not crap flooding the discussion (comments rated over 1) it is using abuse to get other people to act as an amplifier to his crap flooding. If the hidden comments didn't count then the technique is much less effective...

The ratings of Lonesome Cowboy Ernie's comments on that story are:
0/13
0.78/32
0.66/21
0/17
0.2/25
0.04/23
0.11/26
0.67/31

Turn off the amplifier it gets to be a lot harder work for the crapflooder...


Scottish Political Discussion


Uh! (5.00 / 1) (#9)
by Mystic on Thu May 02, 2002 at 05:46:35 PM PST

Maybe I have been out of sync with scoop and the algo being used, hence this question. Do you take into account the rating of hidden comments when deciding the fate of a story that has been in the queue for a long time? That doesn't sound like a logical thing to do!

-(\/)ystic


Interesting article attack strategy | 10 comments (10 topical, 0 hidden)
Display: Sort:

Hosted by ScoopHost.com Powered by Scoop
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective companies. Comments are owned by the Poster. The Rest © 1999 The Management

create account | faq | search