Shenanigans! ):

[aggienaut]

   Something kind of horrible happaned over at ljshootout. The final poll had closed late because I was caught in that storm, and when I came back I was under enough heat so I just closed it immediately and since it was a tie we went to a runoff.

   ...and I didn't get around to looking for fake accounts voting. Well just now, right before announcing the season winner, I thought I'd spot check a few names I didn't recognize. Aaaand well.... it turns out there were a LOT of fake accounts voting. 21 to be exact.

   With these fake votes discarded the results of that vote and the subsequent runoff may well be completely different. So it's a dilemma.

   I posted a poll over at the community but it's community-only (in retrospect I should have made it open so I could ask you guys to vote too). And I don't have a paid account anymore so I guess just answer in comments. I could really use some guidance on how this should be resolved:

(1) Should these usernames be discarded from the poll?
(A) Yes
(B) Yes with a specific exception I will tell you about in comments
(C) Yes but unfortunately the poll already took place, make no changes to who remains in
(D) No, end of story.

(2) Assuming the votes are discarded...
(A)Consider the runoff poll to be against whichever two actually survived the adjusted poll
(B) Consider all three to be in for the runoff poll
(C) Do not change who went on to the runoff poll
(D) If it's not a tie do not consider the runoff to have occured at all!


***EDIT - There seems to be a general consensus the names should be discarded so that's no longer a question. HOWEVER, since there was a vote after this one (the messed up vote was the "final" but it was between three people and then there was a runoff), and especially since the runoff only occurred because there was a tie, there's still a totally open question as to how the runoff should be counted.

The main options seem to be to either run the runoff between the two top people who came out of the now-adjusted final poll (all three of them had pictures in the runoff, the already-eliminated person just couldn't win), or not count the runoff as happening at all. The argument in favour of the runoff itself being discounted is that it wouldn't have occurred if there wasn't a tie. The argument in favour of counting the runoff is that, well, it DID occur, and is an otherwise valid poll. Opinions greatly appreciated.

Comments

You should tackle the Afghan elections!

[devifemme.livejournal.com]

(1) Should these usernames be discarded from the poll?
(A) Yes

(2) Assuming the votes are discarded...

(B) Consider all three to be in for the runoff poll

Tags: drama -- yes, just keep me posted!!

Hugs, Justine

[elvenforever.livejournal.com]

Discard the fake votes and declare the winner based on the real votes?

runoff?

[emo-snal.livejournal.com]

What about the subsequent runoff? See cutpaste below for context:

***EDIT - There seems to be a general consensus the names should be discarded so that's no longer a question. HOWEVER, since there was a vote after this one (the messed up vote was the "final" but it was between three people and then there was a runoff), and especially since the runoff only occurred because there was a tie, there's still a totally open question as to how the runoff should be counted.

The main options seem to be to either run the runoff between the two top people who came out of the now-adjusted final poll (all three of them had pictures in the runoff, the already-eliminated person just couldn't win), or not count the runoff as happening at all. The argument in favour of the runoff itself being discounted is that it wouldn't have occurred if there wasn't a tie. The argument in favour of counting the runoff is that, well, it DID occur, and is an otherwise valid poll. Opinions greatly appreciated.

Re: runoff?

[elvenforever.livejournal.com]

The runoff did occur; the tie was valid; I think there should be one final contest between the two winners and 1st and 2nd place decided as a result. I also like the idea of keeping it anonymous so that the pictures are voted for and not the people.

I am really tired tonight, so if there is something about this I am not getting, I apologize for the fuzziness in my head. :)

And thank you for friending me. Welcome!

Re: runoff?

[emo-snal.livejournal.com]

Thanks for your feedback (:

[amber-n-teal.livejournal.com]

Discard the fake votes and declare the winner based on real votes!
Cheating sucks.

Runoff?

[emo-snal.livejournal.com]

What about the runoff? See cutpaste below for context:

***EDIT - There seems to be a general consensus the names should be discarded so that's no longer a question. HOWEVER, since there was a vote after this one (the messed up vote was the "final" but it was between three people and then there was a runoff), and especially since the runoff only occurred because there was a tie, there's still a totally open question as to how the runoff should be counted.

The main options seem to be to either run the runoff between the two top people who came out of the now-adjusted final poll (all three of them had pictures in the runoff, the already-eliminated person just couldn't win), or not count the runoff as happening at all. The argument in favour of the runoff itself being discounted is that it wouldn't have occurred if there wasn't a tie. The argument in favour of counting the runoff is that, well, it DID occur, and is an otherwise valid poll. Opinions greatly appreciated.

[furzicle.livejournal.com]

Throw the cheaters out!

Everybody's happy.

[memeworrywort.livejournal.com]

1. A
2. B

[kittenboo.livejournal.com]

I would think that the run-off should be run again if the results are different. Because people might have voted differently if they knew the 3rd person could have won.

[emo-snal.livejournal.com]

Oh but the runoff was anonymous so they presumably didn't know who was who

[kittenboo.livejournal.com]

oh I didn't realize that.

maybe i'm wrong but i can't see a reason why you should have to do the run off again. but i would only include the runoff results if the original vote with the fake votes eliminated was different.

[emo-snal.livejournal.com]

yeah if you discard the votes it changes which 2 of the 3 in the runoff were eligible. It was sheer lucky coincidence that all three entered it (being anonymous I had the person no longer eligible in anyway to make it more confusing who is who). But so its a simple case of simply considering the person who now didn't make it to the runoff as noneligible and announcing the winner of the other two.

[amber-n-teal.livejournal.com]

Yeah, then I'd go this way...

[pavel-lishin.livejournal.com]

How about this: only allow people to vote if they have submitted a photo in the past.

Now, there's no way to program LJ for this (afaik), so there would be some hand-tabulation required, but hopefully this would remove any incentive to vote with fake accounts.

But this isn't fair to new members!

Yes it is. They've got cameras and internets, they can get voting rights as soon as they submit something.

What about fake accounts posting a single shitty photo to get voting rights, and never participating again outside of the votes?

Only allow people to vote who have submitted something in the past month.

[pavel-lishin.livejournal.com]

Another objection has occurred to me: But voting should anonymous!

Clearly, people aren't capable of doing this fairly *and* anonymously, so fuck them.

[sra33.livejournal.com]

I mean, personally I'd remove the fakes, then whoever won that poll... wins. :\ I mean, if a completely seperate 3rd person turns out to be the winner, it would kinda suck for those two people in the tie, but they had fake LJs voting for them and they knew the drill, so... well... tough luck to them.

~Sammy-Joe

[oldscratchx.livejournal.com]

I wouldn't include fake accounts if you know for sure they are fake accounts. I would recount with those removed, if there is still a tie, have the run off, if not state your reasoning behind your decision and I'd list the fake accounts.

[aumonae.livejournal.com]

Ugh. Those situations suck. I would count the original votes (minus the fake accounts) and declare a winner. If fraud was the only reason for the second vote then that vote is not valid and holds no bearing on the original.

Just my 2 cents.