-6

This site has less than 20 active users. I can imagine quite easily that a few of them vote in concert because they are more or less like-minded. I got a few rep points taken off for "serial voting". It was about 10% of my overall rep. So it wasn't indicative of any large trend that I can tell.

First, I want to make sure that it wasn't done by Yannis. As much as he tries, he does allow himself more liberties to shape the direction of content rather than control its quality. He recently challenged the motivation for my asking a certain question even though he conceded that the question's content was within the parameters of the site. Vindictiveness is not something that should be expected from the moderators. It erodes the trust in the process.

11

Moderators cannot invalidate votes. This can happen either by an automated process or by a Stack Exchange employee. You may find more details in the help centre.

In this instance, I noticed that you had received an inordinate amount of upvotes from a new-ish account. Investigating further, I found two more accounts that seemed to exist primarily to upvote your posts. Your main account shared IP addresses with all three accounts. You all also shared login times.

I alerted Stack Exchange, shared what I've found and asked them to take a closer look and invalidate any suspicious votes they find. They did and decided to invalidate a number of votes between the four accounts. I'm afraid this is all the information I can share. If you wish to find out more or to challenge my actions and Stack Exchange's decision to invalidate the votes, feel free to contact them directly. You may use this link as a reference (the link will only work for people with diamond access to the site).

As for your last paragraph, again feel free to contact Stack Exchange directly. They take accusations against moderators very seriously, and I'm sure they'd be very interested to see any evidence of my misconduct you have collected.

PS. The site has a lot more active voters than you think.

  • 1
    The site does not have more active voters than I think. politics.stackexchange.com/users?tab=Voters&filter=week – grovkin Aug 8 '18 at 20:19
  • If moderators don't have an ability to reverse votes, then I don't understand this: "If such a voting pattern continues to happen between two users mutually or from one user towards another, or otherwise falls outside of normal voting patterns, moderators and/or developers may investigate the matter; intentionally voting merely to reduce or inflate another user's reputation is considered abuse." It's part of this: politics.stackexchange.com/help/serial-voting-reversed – grovkin Aug 8 '18 at 20:22
  • 5
    @grovkin Moderators can investigate suspicious voting patterns. That's about it. We can't act on it. If we find anything fishy, SE takes over. As I've already explained in my answer. – yannis Aug 8 '18 at 20:25
  • I read more of your answer. I do see what you are talking about. There are 3 people in this household who use the site. It's possible that one other used it from more than 1 computer. You characterization of their activities as "solely existing to upvote my posts" is ridiculous. I don't know how else to describe it. You are being vindictive. You do not like the implications of some of the questions I asked. And I have strong doubts that you simply referred this pattern for an investigation rather than suggested what the results of the investigation should be. – grovkin Aug 8 '18 at 20:26
  • @grovkin It is - of course - possible that I am mistaken. And this is the last I have to say on the matter. Anything else, you'll have to discuss with someone at Stack Exchange. – yannis Aug 8 '18 at 20:30
  • 5
    @grovkin I had a look at the voting trends of the accounts in question, and certainly looks to me like a small number of accounts that almost exclusively vote on each-other's posts, and not on posts outside that small circle – Sam I am Aug 8 '18 at 20:43
  • 6
    @grovkin It doesn't look to me like a voting pattern that can be sufficiently explained by them being "like-minded" – Sam I am Aug 8 '18 at 20:44
  • 2
    @grovkin It's more than just some people from the same IP sometimes voting for each-other. It's a small circle of users that interact almost exclusively with each-other, and not with posts from other users. – Sam I am Aug 8 '18 at 20:58
  • 3
    @grovkin because your account seems to be the one account that interacts with the rest of the site. – Sam I am Aug 8 '18 at 20:59
  • 7
    @grovkin If you do decide to contact support, you should do your best to explain your situation, and why you think it explains the suspicious voting patterns in a way that is not serial voting. You won't get very far trying to convince them that the pattern doesn't even look suspicious, because, they'll look at the pattern, and it will look suspicious to them too. – Sam I am Aug 8 '18 at 22:06
  • 2
    @grovkin looks like this case is actually more about voting ring (deliberately or not) in addition to serial voting... when there's a small group voting for each other almost exclusively, it will look suspicious, no matter what the situation. – Andrew T. Aug 9 '18 at 3:17
  • 1
    @grovkin, I remember myself upvoting your posts quite often. However, nobody blames me for being your sockpuppet — probably because I'm #4 voter of all times on this site. If your family members distributed their contributions to this site more evenly (while still upvoting your posts), this would instantly sort out the whole problem. As for now, you will have hard time even proving that they are different people than you (since SE never demands our IDs like some evil social networks do). – bytebuster Aug 9 '18 at 5:58
  • 1
    Re: "The site does not have more active voters than I think. politics.stackexchange.com/users?tab=Voters&filter=week" That page seems incorrect @grovkin. I have voted in the last week (verified on my profile/activity page), and for whatever reason I am not listed at all there. – Martin Tournoij Aug 9 '18 at 11:35
  • 1
    @MartinTournoij That page is a) only showing people who voted more than 10 times in the selected timeframe and b) cached (i.e. data on it may not be entirely fresh). – yannis Aug 9 '18 at 12:17
  • 1
    @SamIam thanks for clearing that up. I guess I am reading more than I should into people's sentiments. – grovkin Aug 9 '18 at 18:00

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .