You are correct, I was not advocating hacking, I was giving examples
of how easy it is to hack on line polls such as the Age's, though I
must admit that the temptation to hack the yes vote by several million
votes was tempting, so as to make the yes vote look rather dodgy. I
believe the Age poll on duck shooting had closed before I posted the
hack links, or it certainly seemed to have been when I checked it on
it yesterday. The only poll open then was about something called "Oaks
Day Debacle" Is that some tree planting thing that went wrong?
Actually, going by some of the posts on B-A, I must be one of the few
on the list to have only voted once.
On 28/02/2009, at 8:36 PM, Russell Woodford wrote:
I don't think Carl or anyone else was suggesting that anyone should
hack the duck hunting poll on The Age website! What we're saying is
that online polls are fraught with problems - even those that are
scripted to disallow a second vote from the same computer can be
hacked by anyone with scripting knowledge. One way of making these
polls a little more verifiable is requiring every voter to leave a
name and comment - at least that makes it difficult to generate
multiple votes from one source, though not impossible.
I maintain my original belief that the poll result was hacked to give
a high pro-hunting vote. But the hunting lobby could just as easily
claim that the 40% of anti-hunting votes were hacked and that there is
a far smaller voice against duck hunting. Who knows?
Birding-Aus List Owner
Geelong Victoria Australia
To unsubscribe from this mailing list,send the message:
unsubscribe(in the body of the message, with no Subject line)
To unsubscribe from this mailing list,
send the message:
(in the body of the message, with no Subject line)