New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Enhancement: Add user policy objects to limit errant submission votes. #4121
Comments
Thanks for getting this going @ZachBaird. Some new thoughts this morning.
@rlmoser99 has dealt with a few of these incidents 💪 I'd value any thoughts she has about the rules being proposed here. |
Hello @ZachBaird! So good to see you again!
I wonder if having lesson completions would be a better check, because I could see people liking a project on their first project before even starting on it. I wonder if we only need to look at additional details if two users (voter and votee) have the same ip addresses, which is the very first thing that I looked at when researching these incidents. I'll think on this more, but these are my initial thoughts. |
I think the ip address check should be sufficient. We could always roll with that initially and add further restrictions if it still presents an annoying timesink. |
There are valid reasons that two people have the same ip address, like two roommates doing TOP together. When I was researching some of these incidents, I noticed this a handful of times so think it would be useful to also make sure that the account is used - like by checking lesson completions. |
I think that's reasonable! The validation logic can always be refined as needed. |
@KevinMulhern @rlmoser99 Do we feel comfortable moving forward with this task at all? We can start with checking lesson completions and implementing @KevinMulhern 's following suggestion:
That should give us a good starting point to see what else can be done while alleviating the problem. |
I am just adding my 2 cents as I saw this come up in the discord.... I was just pondering the project lists the other day when, once again, a learner in Discord brought up how much better the projects were, and they could not figure out how to do their own. I realized that a) a lot of people look at these even though we tell them not to, b) they use the well-designed projects as a metric for their own, even though this is a dev course, not a design course, and c) as discussed here, people game the system. So, my question...what value do listing these projects have to learners and the process? We do have the showcase is Discord. I just wonder if these are more of a distraction than help. |
@ZachBaird Yes, I am comfortable moving forward with this idea & that approach sounds right. |
@fabulousgk Thank you for sharing your thoughts. Not all of our learners are in Discord, probably less than 20% join Discord. So, the showcase in Discord is not accessible for everyone. I understand your other points, but I don't think removing project submissions is the answer. Feel free to continue to ponder these issues and see if you come up with another idea that we can implement & then make an issue for everyone to discuss. |
Thank you! I am amazed that the Discord population is that small. Wow! |
Complete the following REQUIRED checkboxes:
brief description of request
format, e.g.Add dark mode to website
The following checkbox is OPTIONAL:
1. Description of the Feature Request:
@KevinMulhern and I were discussing how some users game their project submissions by creating dozens of accounts in order to dramatically inflate their project submission's votes.
I proposed adding policies on user accounts that would restrict a user from voting on project submissions until certain requirements were met. The following were suggested:
@KevinMulhern remarked that this was a good idea and could be achieved with policy objects fairly easily.
2. Acceptance Criteria:
update
method.The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: