Aug
15th
2016
24-Hour Clopshots (Episode 15 - ANOTHER EMERGENCY) · 12:14am Aug 15th, 2016
Houston, it appears we have another problem (and another first).
Someone has quite clearly spammed the survey to try and have a certain idea picked. 
I am very, very disappointed in that someone... You probably know who you are...
So my question is... What should I do? Throw out the spammed idea? Just go with the spammy flow and write it?
PS: I put some evidence of said spam below the break.
Evidence of spam A:
Evidence of spam B:
Disqualify the spammed one. That way, it won't seem like a smart idea for next time.
I'd say disqualify it.
/me hopes loudly that it means Rumble and Thunderlane win
4150189 I most say that makes sense.
Disqualify it as a warning to people not to do it again.
4150189
Have agree as well that does make the most sense then to only remove the spammed votes but not remove the choice as a whole then? Because the people who really did vote for it get cheated then as well. So it makes to sense to do it that way then right?
Re-issue the poll, using an authenticaton method, like username entry. Any suspicious entries should be PMed, and the dead link entries disqualified.
4150189 4150192 4150198 4150210
That could incentivize false flag spamming.
4150213 I could do something like this (Google Docs has a simple switch that limits users to 1 response) but it would make it so only users with a Google account can vote. Maybe have people with Google accounts vote through the poll and users without vote through PM? Just because checking every single username would be quite an arduous process (there's usually 150-175 responses each poll). Of course, depending on how many people don't have a Google account, reading through the vote PMs would take a while as well...
4150210 Hard to tell which ones are spam and which ones are not. I can say that, without the 100%-certainly spam votes, Fluttershy does not win the poll.
4150189 4150192 4150201 If I disqualify it, do I disqualify it entirely? As in, it goes from first to last (which means it won't be in the poll for the clopshot during a break week) or should I just move it from 1st to 2nd and put what's in 2nd in 1st? (If that makes any sense...)
4150255
First to last.
They wanted to see it so much they cheated? Too bad. They'll never see it again.
4150261 I agree. Plus doing so might discourage them from coming back and stuffing the ballot again. Granted this does nothing to help with future votes possibly being compromised; however, it is a possible solution for this one. Perhaps redo the voting process but this time without the one that was spammed? (Granted, they might just come back and spam another option.) Still, the one that was cheated to the top should be discarded regardless IMHO.
Although I voted for the spam one, disqualify that one.
4150255
Google accounts are free, so I don't see the problem. If anything, it doesn't raise enough of a barrier; I was wondering whether it was time for you to get on Patreon.
Put each option in a different comment on the vote blog. And have people only upvote them here.
4150255
Just have the poll have two necessary entries, the multiple choice bit, and a fimfiction username entry. If a name gets used more than once, send a message to find out their true vote, so people can't issue other folks' names. If the account does not exist, disregard that vote.
once is all that is needed people don't be stupid i mean seriously even i would do that fic at first site regardless but still just why?
all this spam makes twilight face hoof 
ps. don't listen to him throw it all it does is tell them it works and they will keep going but other people will say do it this also has some pros to it but best idea is just ignore it or he will keep going...
I would probably institute some means of user verification like requiring a google account or whatever, yes. If people want to vote they can take the few minutes it takes to make one. Having people spam your inbox with PM's sounds too tiring.
Sorry that this happened. I appreciate that you're taking the time and effort to try to make this a fair poll.
4150255
>but it would make it so only users with a Google account can vote.
Honestly, I'd rather see real account verification than deal with spam like this, even if it does exclude some users. The problem with disqualifying one option because of spam is that now someone can spam an option they DON'T like in attempt to get it DQ'ed.
Be consequent and declare all votes invalid that happened during the spam time period and only count those that were made outside of the spam time period.
That probably leads to it that you have to declare some legit votes invalid as well (unless the non-spam voters out themselves to you), but this is better than giving in to vote manipulation (if it works, the manipulator will continue and do it the next time as well) or to scrap the option entirely, which would be unfair towards legit voters.
Also, scrapping the idea entirely could lead to the reverse problem in the future.
4150225 has a point here.
wow that's crazy stuff
What about those previous votes from past stories? Where those spam as well?
That must really suck.
Does this voting system track IP address? If so you can say any IP that voted more than say 3 times gets dropped from the polling results.
4150901 No, it doesn't. Just timestamps.
4150894 When it's time to post the winners I always go through and see if there was anything fishy going on with the votes. This is the first time that there's been enough to really change the outcome of the poll.
4150255 That's a good question. Is there any way you can go through and just eliminate the obvious spam votes? I realize this might be a lot of work, but you might be able to at least get a good idea if it would have been close to coming in second. If it is, I'd say include it as a choice.
4151255 I did, and it didn't (it came in third).
4151281 Yeah, I just saw the blog after I posted that. Kind of a shame. That one might have been interesting.
4151047 sounds like to me you should invest in a new survey system. One that includes anti spam features