'Pick this site’s charities for the next year.' Poll results/discussion

gomann

JimmyTheWig wrote: »

Maybe it is time to re-think this process.
Or at least re-think it for future years?

How much money are we talking about here? I'm assuming quite a bit.
I think it is wrong for a charity to focus its efforts (through trickery or otherwise) to get votes in this poll.

Maybe the voting should be by username rather than IP address (assuming that's how it's currently done). And only people who were registered in the forum (or on the weekly mailing list) before the vote was announced could vote.

There's some merit to that, but equally this is the world of the inter-webby thing, where I spend hours every day of my life trying to whip up a bit of cash for assorted causes.

You are suggesting that only subscribers to this site can vote? How many hundred subscribers to the site would you like me to muster over the next 24 hours?

The Internet is a great force for good, spreading knowledge and linking people. My view would be to let it do what it does, globally and freely. But I do understand your reservations ... dammit, I should have kept quiet

Soldierdon

I have to say that I am worried that this worthy cause may be subjected to dubious votes. They have been polling 400 votes an hour roughly and I think this should be looked at.

I am not suggesting cheating but I am concerned about fair play. The main problem is that voting is not cookie controlled so repeat voting is easily possible.

Voting MUST be fair and even handed.

Sd

gomann

Soldierdon wrote: »

I have to say that I am worried that this worthy cause may be subjected to dubious votes. They have been polling 400 votes an hour roughly and I think this should be looked at.

I am not suggesting cheating but I am concerned about fair play. The main problem is that voting is not cookie controlled so repeat voting is easily possible.

Voting MUST be fair and even handed.

Sd

If you're from ARRSE or RR ... please go away.
Copied?
Out.

southernbelle

gomann wrote: »

If you're from ARRSE or RR ... please go away.
Copied?
Out.

oooh, stinking VP

I think you mean...

Acknowledge.
Over.

:cool:

NB This is a jokey jokey nuh nuh post.

gomann

southernbelle wrote: »

oooh, stinking VP
I think you mean...
Acknowledge.
Over.
:cool:
NB This is a jokey jokey nuh nuh post.

He knows who I am.
Are you on day release, Sarah?
[edit ... no it's not you. The spelling's too good, for a start]

Oh, for the sake of a bit of levity ...
"Over" invites a reply.
"Out" definitely doesn't ... its a very clear "Go Away, Mate"

gomann

JimmyTheWig wrote: »

Maybe the voting should be by username rather than IP address (assuming that's how it's currently done). And only people who were registered in the forum (or on the weekly mailing list) before the vote was announced could vote.

An interesting point has been raised by one of the Army guys ... I admit I only just understand this stuff ...

My ISP is the same as my neighbours because we log on through a wireless network provided by a third party, likewise those that log in from Afghan etc are in the same boat as are those who log in via the MoD servers.

Perhaps these filters are blocking thousands of votes from the guys in Iraq and Afghanistan and MoD?

If that is the case, then your proposal to vote by "registered user" has merit. I would think 'registered user' would/could/might prevent the continued [steady rate] voting for certain causes ... still around 120 per hour, and the smell is getting stronger.

It only takes one person [without any authority, but an excess of enthusiasm] to crack the IT system and the entire process is debased.

[edit = BTW, I see the H4H vote is clicking up now that the military are away from their shared office ISP ... possibly?]

And, Sally ... a donation coming from me to Shelterbox as a 'bunch of flowers' from me for impugning your corporate integrity, having been prompted by someone else on ARRSE who has done the same.

I still reckon you've got a clever IT bloke out there, even if you don't know who or where!

gomann

Because the Soaps are on, I'm still here.

Interestingly [a very little bit] the Military are now away from the [blocked?] Corporate network and voting from home.

The last 2 hours ...
H4H 667 votes [a massive increase from roughly 30 per hour during the afternoon].
SBox 287 votes [usual speed, c. 150/hour ... STILL, will he/she/it never tire? :rolleyes: ]

edit = last 15 minutes ...
H4H +67
Box +39

We'll both be winners, but it's 'ard, Guv'nor!!

southernbelle

gomann wrote: »

He knows who I am.
Are you on day release, Sarah?
[edit ... no it's not you. The spelling's too good, for a start]

Oh, for the sake of a bit of levity ...
"Over" invites a reply.
"Out" definitely doesn't ... its a very clear "Go Away, Mate"

Sarah? Not guilty.

You use "copied" on the net?? Blimey, I'd get bawled out if I tried that.

Mandog

All these charities are very worthwhile causes and it's just a shame we can't give meaningful amounts to them all.

Personally I voted for the CAB, because I felt that a charity doing so much work defending the little guy against big corporations and helping people get out of debt was particularly relevant to this website.

gomann

southernbelle wrote: »

If you're going down this route...
Copied?
Requires a reply and therefore should be followed by over.
And "copied" isn't used anyhoo.

OK, that's a vaguely fair call. [It was getting lonely here].

Anyway, he knew who I was, knew what I meant, and got the message ...

This is a very good site, BTW. I shall inhabit [politely] once this little mission is over.