Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Microsoft Caught Rigging ZD Net Poll

Posted by ryuzaki0 on from the now-thats-funny-stuff dept.

Dj writes "Microsoft have been found to be rigging a ZDNet poll". Apparently they didn't dig on the idea of .NET losing. Of course as anyone knows, never trust an online poll because this sort of stuff is obviosly happening all the time. I just wonder how many comments posted around the net are posted with the same goals in mind.

9 of 768 comments (clear)

  1. So why didn't ZDnet pull the poll? by Graabein · · Score: 5, Interesting
    ID ZDnet knew the poll was rigged, why didn't they pull it ASAP?

    The poll is still available here. It carries no warnings or disclaimers that the poll has been massively rigged by Microsoft.

    Why?

    --
    And remember kids: Never trust a computer you can actually lift.
  2. Interesing 'privacy' note... by Masem · · Score: 5, Interesting
    In their 3rd point on the reputed email, ZDNet has to say:
    We know this, because our logs include the Web address where visitors browsed from; when people click there from a Microsoft Exchange email message, Exchange helpfully gives us the subject line and username.
    Certainly, Referrer is a common way to determine where people are coming from, but it seems to be a rather interesting privacy/security problem that MS Exchange would include the username in the HTTP request referrer field. If anything, I would expect a link in email to be a direct entry into a site, thus having no referrer field. (Of course, those of us that use plain text email simply cut and paste, and referrer ends up empty anyway). Even with this, I can see how this would easily work for spammers: have the 'click here to opt-out' link, and even if you have to do additional work on the end site to 'opt-out', they have guarenteed your email address at that point.

    --
    "Pinky, you've left the lens cap of your mind on again." - P&TB
    "I can see my house from here!" - ST:
  3. Re:There's a shocker by DRO0 · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Maybe, maybe not. If you do a search on google for "poll rig fix", here's the 3rd result.

    http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/1/13255.html

  4. Re:Is this terribly different? by Hooya · · Score: 5, Interesting
    it's not terribly different only just slightly. When i hit a link on slashdot asking me to go vote for something, i'm not being paid by slashdot in any shape or form. thus there is no obligation on my part to comply with that request. whatever my reactions are are solely mine. on the other hand, when your employer asks you to 'stop what you're doing for a minute and go do this...', you have been asked to do something for which you are being paid for (you are on company time).

    Therefore, we could conclude that people were paid to vote on MSs behalf. Whereas when we click on a link on slashdot, unless you're CmdrTaco or CowboyNeal etc.. you're not being paid to do so and are under no obligation. not terribly different, but slightly enough to make a huge difference. Asking someone to vote one way or the other vs. paying someone to do so. slightly different.

  5. Re:There's a shocker by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Definitely not. In fact they have done much worse stuff, at the executive level.

  6. Happens all the time by ttfkam · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I really does, and not just online. I worked for a company that did websites for radio stations. We were reading results from a poll as part of an on-air contest where people could call in or use the web to vote for their favorite band. After a snafu with the data, we contacted the station to apologize for losing about a quarter of the results of the first few hours of the contest. We were expecting to be (quite rightly) reamed for it even though the contest had the rest of the week to run its course.

    As it turned out, they didn't mind at all. They had already decided who the top two choices would be and only cared which of the two came out on top. In short, Limp Bizkit was popular, but not THAT popular.

    I won't name names, but perhaps folks who listen to popular radio in the Chicago area (and other major venues) should keep this in mind the next time your radio station claims to give you what *YOU* want.

    It's not just online...

    --

    - I don't need to go outside, my CRT tan'll do me just fine.
  7. History repeating by Tim+Macinta · · Score: 5, Interesting
    I just wonder how many comments posted around the net are posted with the same goals in mind.

    Microsoft got caught ages ago with its hand in the cookie jar doing exactly that with the Barkto indcident.

    --

    -----

    Free P2P Backup, Windows & Linux

  8. Re:Hmmmm.... by geekoid · · Score: 4, Interesting

    If a UPS guy runs over somebody while on UPS time, UPS is held accountable.
    If the register person at McDonalds reaches across the coulter an punches you, McDonalds is responsibles.
    If I write a sript that causes another company to loose all its data, the company I work for is responsible.

    Sure, the people who commmit the offence are to blame as well, but company are responsible for the actions of there employee's.

    If a company sent you an email that said "Please remeber to Go Vote", an thats it, fine, got no problm with that, but if a company says "Go Vote For Gore" Now we have a problem. PIF, companies have gotten into trouble for encouraging employees to vote for a specific candidate.

    --
    The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
  9. Re:What happened by Satai · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I seriously doubt that this was organized by anyone high level at MS.. probably just a salesman who thought it would be a good idea to get everyone to vote in the poll.

    The question on my mind... was he fired - or promoted?