Comment on Private voting has been added to PieFed

• shnizmuffin@lemmy.inbutts.lol ⁨2⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

  If the same account is voting in the same direction on every single post and comment in an entire community in a matter of seconds while contributing neither posts nor comments? Yes, vote manipulation.

  If one user is following another around, down voting their content across a wide range of topics? Yes, targeted harassment.

  source

  • perviouslyiner@lemmy.world ⁨2⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

    Wouldn’t banning the voting half of the pseudonymous account not fix the immediate issue, or is it necessary to ban the associated commenting account without assistance from their instance admin?

    source

    • shnizmuffin@lemmy.inbutts.lol ⁨2⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

      Well, doesn’t that fly in the face of federated autonomy and privacy?

      On one end, if it’s my instance and I want to ban a user, I want the whole fucking user banned – not just remove their ability to vote anonymously. If one of my communities or users is being attacked, it’s my responsibility to react. If I can’t remove the whole problem with a ban, then I have to remove the whole problem with a de-federation. (A thing I fundamentally don’t want to do.)

      On the other, if some other admin says, “one of your users is being problematic, please tell me who they are,” I’m going to tell that other admin to fuck right off because I just implemented a feature that made their votes anonymous. I’m not about to out my users to some rando because they’re raining downvotes on MeinHitler69@nazi.hut.

      It’s a philosophical difference of opinion.

      source

      • Socsa@sh.itjust.works ⁨2⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

        But if the only bad behavior is voting and you can that agent then you’ve solved the core issue. The utility is to remove the bad behavior, no?

        source

        • -> View More Comments
  • can@sh.itjust.works ⁨2⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

    I think a ban based on those criteria should apply to main acct but I’m not sure how it’s implemented.

    source
  • doctortran@lemm.ee ⁨2⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

    Sure, but by the same token, mods are just as capable of manipulation and targeted harassment when they can curate the voting and react based on votes.

    On reddit, votes are only visible to the admins, and the admins would take care of this type of thing when they saw it (or it tripped some kind of automated something or other). But they still had the foresight not to let moderators or users see those votes.

    Complete anonymity across the board won’t work but they’re definitely needs to be something better than it is now.

    source

    • shnizmuffin@lemmy.inbutts.lol ⁨2⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

      mods are just as capable of manipulation and targeted harassment when they can curate the voting and react based on votes

      I’m not sure what you’re trying to say.

      I’m speaking as an admin, not as a mod. I own the servers. I have direct access to the databases. When law enforcement comes a’knockin’, it’s my ass that gets arrested. I have total control over my instances and can completely sever them from the fediverse if I feel it necessary. Mods are mall cops that can lock posts and deal with problem users one at a time.

      On reddit, votes are only visible to the admins, and the admins would take care of this type of thing when they saw it (or it tripped some kind of automated something or other)

      There are no built in automations. Decoupling votes from the users that cast them interferes with my ability to “take care of this type of thing.”

      source

      • rimu@piefed.social ⁨2⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

        Yeah, I see that and it does concern me now that it has been brought up.

        However. In the last 6 months of being active in the 'Lemmy.world defense hq' matrix room where we coordinate admin actions against bad people, vote manipulation has come up once or twice. The other 99% of the time it's posts that are spam, racist or transphobic. The vote manipulation we found detected using some scripts and spreadsheets, not looking at the admin UI. After all, using code is the only way to scan through millions of records.

        Downvote abuse/harassment coming from PieFed will be countered by monitoring "attitude" and I have robust tools for that. I can tell you with complete confidence that not one PieFed user downvotes more than they upvote. I can provide 12 other accounts on Lemmy instances that do, tho. Lemmy's lack of a similar admin tool is unfortunate but not something I can do anything about.

        What I've done with developing this feature is taken advantage of a weakness of ActivityPub - anyone can make accounts and have them do stuff. Even though I've done it in a very controlled and limited way and released all the code for it, having this exposed feels pretty uncomfortable. There were many many people droning on about "votes must be public because they need to come from an account" blah blah and that secure safe illusion has been ripped away now. That sucks, but we were going to have to grapple with it eventually one way or another.

        Anyway. I'm not wedded to this or motivated by a fixed ideology (e.g. privacy über alles) so ripping this out is an option.

        source
  • Socsa@sh.itjust.works ⁨2⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

    Is that really harassment considering Lemmy votes have no real consequences besides feels?

    source