Slashdot Mirror
Microsoft Caught Rigging ZD Net Poll
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.
This is what their marketing department does all day ...
Figures.
-----
Did Microsoft bother to write a script to do it, or did they just give everyone in the office building a salary increase based on how many times they clicked the mouse on the little button that day? :)
I see CowboyNeal getting way fewer votes than I think he should in /. polls.
Many addled Microsoft employees mistakenly voted for Pat Buchanan
Wow, M$ must be really hurting for cash! They usually just buy a good rating!
"The large print giveth, and the small print taketh away" -- "Step Right Up", Tom Waits
Acually, ZDnet is sure in .NET won, Florida's votes haven't came it yet......
pronoblem
Well, it sorta was...
.NET!" 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. The people who followed that link all had email addresses in the microsoft.com domain.
Several of the voters evidently followed a link contained in an email, the subject line of which ran: "PLEASE STOP AND VOTE FOR
... this is particularly annoying because it's exactly this sort of statistic that will be used by middle-management (and/or Microsoft flacks) to justify switching project backbones to .NET
.NET! Guess we should too!"
"Well, look, this says 74% of programmers out there are eager to use
It's not like this is some hobbyist site. It's ZDNet. Some people actually listen to them.
And it's not like you're voting for Coolest Transformer of All Time. They're creating a grossly skewed statistic that could actually be used to figure out where millions of dollars gets invested.
AHHHHHHH! I'm burning with goodness again!
- Reakk, Sluggy Freelance
We'll I guess I can assume that I am the only one that finds this funny... Companies do this stuff ALL the time.. and just because some over vealous programmer or marketing rat thought to send all his buddies over to vote, doesnt mean that this is further evidence of some kinda pro-monopolistic attitude... its just people who like their products... ...not that i dont think they ARE a monopoly (I think that has been effectively proven) but....
The two rules for success are:
1) Never tell them everything you know.
They'll be trolling slashdot and having dead people send letters to their congresscritters.
Best Slashdot Co
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.
"Pinky, you've left the lens cap of your mind on again." - P&TB
"I can see my house from here!" - ST:
Is this terribly different from what happens when slashdot has a post announcing some poll about linux? I'm sure we've rigged our share in the past. Not that I think Microsoft is right. I'm just trying to give a little perspective and play devil's advocate for a moment. Feel free to mod me down because you dissagree.
Dozings.com -- Its kinda funny... If you're as crazy as me.
First of all this wasn't some deep dark conspiracy to use a masterfully written web script to rig a poll. Instead, they just sent a chain email to vote for their side. This has happened at Slashdot; here, click here to vote to fire Jon Katz. See?
I think the real humor in this situation is that they got busted by Exchange passing the subject line in the HTTP header when you click through. Their own anti-privacy measures just bit them in their collective corporate ass. Maybe this will cause them to think twice next time?
What probably happened is, some MS sales guy stumbled across the poll so he drafted an e-mail entitled "PLEASE STOP AND VOTE FOR .NET!" This goes along with the take-no-prisoners attitude that has been seen coming from MS execs like that sales guy who wrote the "kill linux" e-mails. So the e-mail makes the rounds, everyone at MS clicks over to the poll and votes for .NET. Nothing major, just shows you why web polls can't be trusted.
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.
Because it's not illegal to rig a poll on some web site. Now, doctoring evidence sumitted in a court case...THAT should be punishable.
Bill Clinton: Pimp we can believe in. - The Shirt!!!
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
It seems far more likely that an internal e-mail encouraged MS employees to vote for .NET, and they did. They seem quick to point out that some people from the microsoft.com domain tried to use automated voting, and they therefore blame that on the parent corporation. I'd have a much easier life if I could blame all my problems on my employer too.
My questions would be, "Did anyone else outside the microsoft.com domain try to use automated voting for any of the contestants?" or, "Do you have any evidence that the e-mail sent out encouraged ballot stuffing?"
How would a simple email with a link encouraging employees to vote be different than a presidential candidate sending an e-mail out telling everyone register for their party or even go an vote? Sure, there's an obvious bias, but what makes you think that *anyone* is voting that doesn't have a bias?
This all reeks of sensationalism and media-based MS-bashing. Whether you like MS or not, MS-bashing is old-hat.
Meanwhile, apparently it's too much effort to even link to their own story explaining their poll, so that when Microsoft tries to use it as propaganda there's a big 'How this poll was rigged by Microsoft' link...
Obviously, anyone who's ever tried to take a poll knows that everyone tries to vote multiple times. Of course, there's no easy way to know whether someone is doing it or not; IP logging only works for those with static IPs, and between dialup and large-environment DHCP God only knows that it's hard to do that.
I don't want to think about it this way, but maybe cookies are the way to go for this sort of thing?
Either that, or we need to stop thinking of Web polls as reliable.
-Sax
"On that train all graphite and glitter, undersea by rail. Ninety minutes from New York to Paris..." -Donald Fagen, IGY
As show recently on the website www.ZDnet.com online polling is often subject to massive fraud and inapropriate uses. Microsoft has again chosen to lead the way in this expanding market with an extention to the Hailstorm initative called "Zeitgiest".
"Hailstorm.Zeitgeist.net will allow content creators new abilities to track online poll submitions and ensure acurate results", says Microsoft Chairman Bill Gates. "With this technology available our marketing departments will finaly be able to track down those whiny little.. Oh, wrong one." *FUMBLE* *FUMBLE* "This technology will will allow webmasters to do neat stuff with authentication", continued Gates.
When asked for his input CEO Steve Balmer added "DEVELOPERS, DEVELOPERS, DEVELOPERS!"
In possibly related news 1337 script kiddy Dr3am!D3m0n on the IRC channel #hax0r5 commented, "Oh cool. That dwarf thing was funny but I guarantee RMS is gonna be on People's 25 Sexiest Celebrities this year."
You know, once upon a time, I was a big Microsoft fan. I liked how easy it was to do things, and how empowered I felt in running Windows. The other day I noticed (after a Google search) that Microsoft had a Content Management Server that was using .Net.
Over the past several years I've become very negative towards Microsoft, since my Windows constantly crashed, and they were clearly trying to shut out others.
About a week ago I thought to myself, well maybe there's just too my anti-Microsoft hype. Perhaps some of these e-mails being forwarded to The Register are just hoaxes.
But now today, ZDNet reveals Microsoft trying to disrupt things and act like a big bad monopoly. Now, ZDNet has kissed Microsoft's butt so often it isn't fun, and David Coursey who's now running Anchordesk is such a pro-Microsoft weenies I get sick. But there it is, on a ZDNet site (albeit the UK site, but still).
Guess the hype just ain't hype.
The power of accurate observation is commonly called cynicism by those who have not got it. - G.B. Shaw
There's no reason to think that any of the people who voted in that poll are actually planning to deploy any kind of Web infrastructure, ever. Most of those who voted are probably 13 year olds who think that "Java is cool", so they voted for it.
Even if the poll results were completely "fair" before MS started stuffing ballots, who's to say that the cross-section of people that responded was at all appropriate. Real polling companies spend a lot of effort trying to get statistically-valid results, which is why they charge money for the service.
I know that if any product I work on shows up in a popularity poll (again), I'll vote early and often, and encourage others to do the same.
-Mark
Hmmmm...maybe someone from the "Linux Rulez" crowd has hacked it, made it look like MS was voting for themselves when really they weren't, revealed it, and MS is really innocent but looks like the big evil giant when really they have done no wrong because the d00d hacked the site......yeah, that's what happened!!!!
:)
Plans within plans within plans!!!!
".Net vote rigging illustrates importance of Web services"l if they think MS's tactics are anything new... the company has been doing the same shit for at least 10-15 years, if not more...
Oh, I thought "Net Rigging Illustrates Dishonesty of Microsoft" or something like that, or perhaps the fact they they have a hard time imagining competing in a market where they don't have domination or some massive advantage.
"The inevitable conclusion is that these are some of the first salvos in what will be a bitter PR struggle. Microsoft may have shot itself in the foot this time, but future efforts may be a little more subtle."
Um, yeah, Microsoft just started their first PR war and they might start using sneaky tactics soon! Um, anyone can go read http://www.mackido.com/History/Where_is_stack.htm
Well, I guess this dishnoesty probably wasn't official. More like just some sucky group of MS employees, I guess...
Juln
Second, Microsoft uses proxying for Internet-related stuff, which could make the multi-vote issue appear to be worse than it actually is, as many separate users would come from a single IP.
Third, yes, it seems someone ran a script from within the microsoft.com domain. That could've been anyone in the company with a PC. My bet is on "random stupid employee". If it were an actual conspiracy, I doubt they would've done it from something within the microsoft.com domain.
In short, it's the same bullshit that happens with every web poll. While it doesn't reflect well on the company, it almost certainly is the evil marketing conspiracy that everyone makes it out to be.
Rather, this is about a company creating an illusion of popularity, in order to sell a technology and a philosophy that customers are hesitent to buy. People are keen to keep up with the Jonses, but nobody wants to be caught with a dead fish. Microsoft knows this. The only way
THAT is the purpose of the ballot rigging. And this may actually be a further Monopoly violation. They are leveraging a monopoly in one area to create a monopoly in another. This is in violation of the Sherman Act, which Microsoft has been convicted of violating.
Should this "incident" be taken to the courts, as evidence of further legal violations, by the dissenting States, I could very well imagine the judge being extremely unhappy with Microsoft. Breaking the law that you're already on trial for breaking generally doesn't win many friends.
The leaked letters, alleging that Microsoft is trying to spy out Linux installations, and pressure companies into replacing them, during technical support calls, may also prove a bitter poison to Microsoft, come March.
This is not the mark of a company in fear. This is the mark of a company that has had its fear glands surgically removed, and is hell-bent on enslaving all minds and all technology to its will.
In short, Microsoft's recent attitudes are perfectly timed, given the recent LoTR movie release. Forget the Borg, Bill Gates is either Sauron or Morgoth.
It's a small world and it smells funny; I'd buy another if it wasn't for the money; Take back what I paid (SoM)
I imagine. After all, ZDnet is SUPPOSED to do this kind of thing for them.
Johnny Quest has two Daddies.
Disclaimer: I'm not a Microsoft fan, but every now and then I pretend to be reasonable.
The headline seems a bit misleading. Was any evidence presented that Microsoft the company, and not a handful of Microsoft employees, deliberately chose to rig the poll? It seems more likely that some developer in the web services group with a little too much team spirit saw the poll and sent a mail to other developers asking them to vote. Big deal. Then some jerk hacked up a form submission script to tilt the poll results in Microsoft's favor. Pretty sad, but again, big deal. As the editor said, you can't trust an online poll to represent anything approaching reality. (At least that's what I tell myself every time I view CNN quick poll results)
It's terribly short sighted of tech companies to resort to this type of tactic, because it makes everyone in the industry look bad. Gloating over M$ getting bashed for this kind of behavior doesn't do much for improving public perception of technology companies. A lot of people I know already have a negative view of Information Technology and think it's eletist.
Here's to hoping companies learn to behave more ethically, but I'm not holding my breathe.
Definitely not. In fact they have done much worse stuff, at the executive level.
Here's another question -- how many of these web polls are posted with the primary goal of getting posted in one or more advocacy forums and generating hits, which is why a lot of sites and mailing lists have a flat policy against announcing them? I mean, that's what web polls are for, right? So Mac / Java / BSD / Amiga / what have you fans can compete to see who can more thoroughly stuff the ballot box. Don't tell me you guys actually take those results seriously?
I thought using the word "rigging" in this context ("Ohmigod! Microsoft is destroying the integrity of a ZDNet click-poll!") was as outlandish as it was going to get, but then already there's the guy pulling out the bold tag to wonder why the MS board is going to jail over this. Clearly, this is a job for that Craig guy who spent months pestering everyone on Gnotices and dot.kde.org to spam the poll on his site...
What I'm listening to now on Pandora...
according to the poll numbers only 1057 people voted for .NET (1415 Votes Total), It wouldnt take much to get those kind of numbers, especially shooting out a company wide email.
Where I work there are 1100+ people in my office and most just click links in email for the heck of it (can you say outlook virus?)...
Thanks to file sharing, I purchase more CDs
Thanks to the RIAA, I buy them used...
He has to be, he's getting way too many votes
http://www.kubuntu.org/
This certainly isn't the worst story that has been posted by Taco et al, but it's still bad. The fact that it can stimulate a lot of discussion doesn't make it any more intelligent.
So, I think top level stories should be subject to moderation. Then, everyone would have an (approximate) idea of which stories really are the best.
Hey, it works for posts! (at least IMHO)
Please mod this post only if you think others should/n't read this. I have enough ego^H^H^Hkarma. Thanks!
Not to sound pro-Microsoft (or pro-Linux, pro-*BSD, etc), but who really cares? it's just another web popularity poll with no scientific basis or anything. So someone at Microsoft saw the poll and sent around an email telling everyone to vote for .NET, and to pass the message along. This isn't any different than if Linux users did the same thing, pass an email around and tell people to vote Linux. The poll basically means NOTHING. The same thing happened at the college I went to, there was some online battle of the Mascots or something and I'd get emails from the IS dept secretary telling us to vote for Bucky Badger. Same exact thing.
As for the automated multiple vote scripts...well, can't blame them for trying.
I think one of the primary reasons people use polls is as a "weapon of the underdog". If you're rooting for use of the most visable/highly-advertised and touted product, you have no need for a poll.
.Net, or any of their other products.
People like to arm themselves with statistics when they're trying to defend an alternate choice. Right now, Linux is one of those alternate choices.
Therefore, you can expect the Linux community to get vocal about going to site X or Y and casting a vote in favor of the OS. Microsoft, on the other hand, would really only do this to ensure that opposing views are silenced. They don't need a ZDNet poll to convince people to use
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.
Bill: Damnit, blocked again.
Steve: Bill, if it didn't work the other 226 times you tried to reclick, what makes you think it will work the 227th?
There is a very high incidence of people attempting to cast multiple votes, even though the poll script blocked out most attempts at multiple voting. The one that wins the prize made 228 attempts to vote. This person was from within the microsoft.com domain.
There will soon be a poll on the Microsoft web site where 90% will indicate that Microsoft did nothing wrong and the allegation is completely unfounded.
No, I don't believe that the profit motive is an excuse for rigging a poll. But I'm surprised that someone hasn't tried to make this argument yet.
TheFrood
If you say "I'll probably get modded down for this..." then I will mod you down.
Microsoft got caught ages ago with its hand in the cookie jar doing exactly that with the Barkto indcident.
-----
Free P2P Backup, Windows & Linux
Of course, the "powers that be" probably won't care that Microsoft cheated on this (or any other) poll. All they know is to bet on a winner -- Microsoft -- even if that winner is a lying, cheating scum-bag. After all, winning is all that matters in the U.S. today, isn't it?
Damn, I'm getting cynical in my old age. ;)
All about me
Look, I think this is stupid and lame, of course. Not too different from posting a link to a poll asking about a linux port to linuxgames.com... But still not cool.
But have we forgotten about MS fabricating letters to congress? Using -dead- people as the names, so at least there would be a real name there? Forget stupid zdnet polls... MS has engaged in true astroturfing with the intent to sway government in their favor (above and beyond the usual political contributions/manipulation of the illuminati to put GWB in charge). There is no comparison between these two events, other than if MS will send false letters to congress it is 0 surprise to see them hacking an online poll.
The enemies of Democracy are
If anyone wanted to slashdot a ZDNet 'Will you install Linux on a computer in 2002' poll... the address is http://polls.zdnet.co.uk/zdnuk/?p=26&m=1.
But at least they are *incompetent* bastards....
Everyone should know by now that Microsoft will pull any and everything they can. I believe the Hollowen Documents prove that.
The extent that MS goes is probably yet to be realized by even those at MS who are participating in some of it.
Slashdot could actually start a game called "Tag the MS cronies" that comment here for the purpose of trying to sway OSS, GPL and the like, thoughts towards the "pro-MS" mindset.
The difference here is that ZDnet isn't a small-time website. ZDnet is fairly well respected in large corporate management circles (frightening, I know). All sorts of corporate justifications and purchases are made based on the content of large sites such as ZDNet.
If I were a Microsoft-friendly IT person who wanted to standardize on .NET for my corporate computing infrastructure, one of the things I might do is hit ZDNet and start pulling down stats. Well, look at what I'd find: A recent poll says that 74% of users prefer .NET to Java.
Not knowing the ways of the net (and you'd be surprised at just how many corporate IT workers *don't*), I'd pull the stat, put it in a nice report, and quote the source as "Ziff Davis Net" ... and it probably wouldn't even occur to me to credit it as an unofficial poll, or that it could even be ballot stuffed.
That's why people are annoyed about this. Sure, ballot stuffing happens all the time on web polls. But when it happens on a large enough site, ballot stuffing can actually influence millions of dollars worth of sales.
That's the typical MS MO. They did it the several times when they got caught faking grassroots movements. They did it with the intimidating error you got when running the Windows 3.1 beta with DRDOS. They did it when they got caught commiting perjury in court. And they did it when their evil army of flying monkeys got caught disrupting Linux kernel development efforts. Ok, so I made that last one up.
And the thing that blows my mind is that people keep believing them!
I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?
Also, most of us have nothing to gain by voting. Microsoft employees are bound to get large bonuses if .NET does well. On the other hand, if Linux suddenly took off and replaced Windows on every computer, I have not really gained anything more than I had before. The reverse is true as well, if Linux suddenly dropped off the Earth, I would have lost only a very little. Microsoft employees have their jobs to worry about if .NET dies.
looking at the numbers, I would say quite a few resisted... (.Net only got 1057 votes)
Thanks to file sharing, I purchase more CDs
Thanks to the RIAA, I buy them used...
Imagine what Windows would be like if M$ spent as much money on QA as they did on marketing!
I've long suspected Cowboy Neal of rigging the slashdot polls.
I Heart Sorting Networks
The goal of a poll is to get a random sampling since they can't possibly interview every developer. Assuming that readers visit the site in the same proportion that they develop in, this is done pretty well. What MS did was shift that proportion and thus mess up the poll. But, since ZDnet claimed that double voters were blocked, everyone still got one vote. And since many of the people at MS will be using .NET, they really didn't cheat or lie. They just lowered the credibility of the poll. That's the same thing as hearing of a poll and visiting the site just to vote and show your support. That, too could be considered tainting the poll since it messes up the random distribution of site visitors. In short: Online polls mean nothing.
Today is the closing of a parenthesis opened before this sig, before this story, before this existence that is me (as if
I really hate to admit it, but really, this probably isnt truly poll fixing.
.net, both, or neither.
.net framework), the microsoft site (again, heavily implementing .net), msn, msn messenger, outlook, or other apps (yep, .net) ... then really, they're answering truthfully. ZDNet doesnt say "employees of the given companies should not vote" or "developers associated with the projects should refrain from voting", so I dont see any real problem here...
The question asked: which will you be implementing in the coming year, java ,
Now, if you worked for microsoft, especially doing anything with the next os (which obviously supports the new
But that's just my opinion. I'll probably end up at -1 troll or -1 flamebait.
Video for Online Dating Profiles
On the poll archive page, there is this message at the top:
.Net by a factor of three in this poll. By early January, the position had reversed; the results are shown here. An investigation indicated that Microsoft employees used vote-rigging to distort the results. The full story can be found here.
Poll Results
On 21 December, ZDNet posted a story reporting the preliminary results of this poll, which showed a large majority of respondents who said they planned to deliver applications via Web services by the end of 2002 favoured Java for the job. At the time, Java outranked
I'm not a prophet or a stone-age man,
I'm just a mortal with potential of a super man.
This is typical Microsoft. Some organized big evil company might have orchestrated something at the highest level, used a variety of IP addresses from around the world, etc. But Microsoft doesn't have a clue--they don't rig this as part of some master plan, they just engage in some lousy mass mailing. It's like all the other areas where Microsoft wins through poor practices (bad quality control, incorrect claims of innovation, announcing and releasing before a product is ready, poor standards compliance, etc.). And while some people know the truth, the ZDNet figures are probably already being quoted in boardrooms around the world (yes, it's stupid, but that doesn't stop management from doing it). Let's hope this one will backfire for them and people will trust Microsoft-friendly statistics and reports less in the future.
I can see it now:
PHB: We have to use Java for our next project.
Dilbert: Why?
PHB: According to this ZDNet poll, 99% of IT Professionals say it's the best choice.
Dilbert: Ummm... 1,234,243,324,234 votes for Java vs. 98,234,242,123 for .Net. Doesn't that tell you something?
PHB: Don't bother me with the technical details, just get to work. We have a client in London with a trillion customers who need it by next Tuesday.
For all intensive purposes, "whom" is no longer a word. That begs the question, "who cares"?
Not to mention anybody who has the consciousness level of a gold fish would notice that the opensource movement regularily uses /. to "rig" polls.
"Other companies may be smart enough not to get caught!"
This is probably true and I share your sentiment.
Wealth is the product of man's capacity to think. -Ayn Rand
I can just imagine a programmer sitting in his chair, stroking his chin after reading the "Please vote for us at ZDNet" poll and thinking "Yes, yes..... I can prove myself to Bill Gates with this."
Then again, I'm sure most major corporations, seeing their name up at a poll on a major site, will give a heads up to their employees to visit the URL. I mean, obviously companies like Apple, Sun, and HP do it. Someone must be voting for HP-UNIX on those sites. ;)
Is sending out this much information an Exchange-specific thing?
Hmm. When i go to the poll link listed i get this:
.Net by a factor of three in this poll. By early January, the position had reversed; the results are shown here. An investigation indicated that Microsoft employees used vote-rigging to distort the results. The full story can be found here."
"On 21 December, ZDNet posted a story reporting the preliminary results of this poll, which showed a large majority of respondents who said they planned to deliver applications via Web services by the end of 2002 favoured Java for the job. At the time, Java outranked
The last line of the article:
Microsoft may have shot itself in the foot this time, but future efforts may be a little more subtle.
Definitely. This was just a probe to see what the reaction would be. This will probably blow over and nobody (at least not a large number) of people will care, and so Microsoft will continue to do things like this in their usual amoral fashion.
Think about it, is this illegal? No. Do millions of people really care about the results of a ZDNet poll? Not really. Will anyone change their preference based on this data? Nope. So why did they put such an effort into it? They did this to "test the defenses," as people say.
Of course we could all be wrong and this could be some pimple faced haxor trying to make MS look bad...
~ now you know
So, am I to assume you are being paid to read slashdot? Lucky dog! I mean, what obligation were you under to read Slashdot? It's interesting that you would consider that a minor difference.
Friends don't help friends install M$ junk.
I agree with you... up to the point that each person should vote once. But I guess the guy who submitted 228 votes for MS will be implementing 228 different web services next year?
- fader
Hey everybody on the "slashdog" BBS, jsut wanted everybody to know, MICRSOOFT IS TEH BEST operating program for computers. Lunxi stinks and you can't get good games like Xbox for it. I know because I've used LUnix a very long time, since 1989 at least. But no more. Also GLP license is for terrorists.
NET. rules!
John if you're reading this where is taht check? I posted like 100 of these alreaedy.
At least the audience at ZDNet is likely to be aware that such things happen.
What bothers me is when CNN puts up a poll like "Now that we've squashed the Taliban, should we go after Saddam Hussein?"
For one thing, their audience is less likely to be familiar with statistical methods, and for another, I'm sure I've heard them report the results of "an online survey" as news, which gives it far more weight than it deserves.
Yes - there are just no limits to how far the opensource movement will go to make CowboyNeal win..
The basic problem here is that the poll's respondents are self-selecting, which as any good statistics student -- or anyone with a modicum of common sense -- will tell you, immediately renders the results dubious at best.
Several people on this thread have observed that if the story had made /. in time, the slashbots could have voted it back the other way, "evening things up". Unfortunately, all that happens then is that the poll's response is 45% MS, 45% /. and 10% real respondents, whose opinion is lost in the noise. In other words, the poll result now looks like it's close but isn't actually representative at all. If anything, that might be more misleading; at least the MS rig is obvious.
Such is the price you pay for self-selection. It only takes one group to get together with a common purpose, and your result will go their way. This is why the consultants choose a random sample of a few thousand from their target audience -- and then ask them questions carefully phrased to bias the responses in favour of the desired outcome, but we'll gloss over that bit... :-)
If you disagree, post your argument. (-1, Overrated) isn't your personal censorship tool for views you don't like.
Was this article useful to you
1/9/2002:
Very 40%
Somewhat 50%
No 10%
2/9/2002:
Very -20%
Somewhat -10%
No 100%
Hey stop picking on Microsoft and buy lots of their products 130%
It's 10 PM. Do you know if you're un-American?
Which of these next generation consoles do you hope to be spending the most time with in 2002?
http://polls.zdnet.co.uk/zdnuk/?p=24&d=O
Thanks to file sharing, I purchase more CDs
Thanks to the RIAA, I buy them used...
:-)
Accountability on the heads of the powerful.
Power in the hands of the accountable.
...Bernard Shifman to pull this off.
English is not my first language, so cut me some slack -: Om du kan lasa det har sa kan du Svenska
As if Slashdot never tries to rig one of these "polls" -- pointing one out and urging people to vote in a particular way.
Anyway, the real story is that Microsoft's software leaks information out of corporations that may be damaging to the reputations of its users, and then even Microsoft itself can't control this. Businesses often get burned by this in Word, where earlier deleted text is still in the file.
and i attempt cast multiple votes on slashdot, consistently, not because it works, but because i get bored and have nothing better to do than hit refresh to see what new comments have shown up on the page ....
it's possible the 228 votes were one person hitting reload to see the current status, not attempting to vote, but rather attempting to view the resulting page.
Mooniacs for iOS and Android
If Microsoft were smart they'd have taken advantage of the IIS vulnerabilities that had caused mass bandwidth waste earlier this year. If each of the hacked machines voted in the poll appropriately prior to infecting its peers they wouldn't have been caught. (It would have been detected, but it wouldn't necessarily be attributal to Microsoft)
Chris Kuivenhoven is a thief, beware
You know, MS has pulled this kind of thing before and have been left unpunished by the general public. They are so confident of their position that they do not FEAR public backlash. Their market share is SO dominant that this kind of this is merely shrugged off and ignored by MS.
THIS is the kind of thing that should tell the doubters that MS is a monopoly. If any other company had done this, the "mea culpa" would have been posted at the bottom of the news story. What has MS done? Nothing, ignored it, becuase they feel that they cannot be impacted by it.
I used to work for a company that would send out emails, encouraging us to write our representitives when a law that was going to hurt the company was coming up for a vote. No matter that the law might be good for the employees or the public at large.
Companies have learned since the eighties, that nothing can touch them, but other companies. The public has no rights, and employees have no rights. Companies are free to pursue thier own best interests, regardless of the dubious moral nature of the actions, or the impact on the public in general.
Many many fear big government, but I fear Big Business more. At least in government I have the illusion of a say.
I disagree, and not just because of the technical definition of "fraud". here's my thinking on the subject (for the record, I have helped "fix" online polls before, and I still think Microsoft is evil):
Anybody who knows anything about statistics knows that online polls are meaningless. Unfortunately, a lot of decision makers at large companies are deficient in their math education (which is a whole different story).
So, it's possible that somebody might be influenced by the poll. Since the poll is known to have no scientific basis, there's no reason not to rig it, since that looks better for Microsoft. Unless you get "caught", of course.
Unless online poll providers make some effort to ensure that their poll results are valid and accurate, or to educate the viewers that they're not, it's always going to be in somebody's best interest to try to swing the poll.
Fundamentally, I think that fixing a poll is no different from other actions that companies take to protect their reputation or promote their products.
-Mark
... because everyone knows online polls aren't statistically valid by any stretch of the imagination.
In your dreams. NOT everyone knows this, and even if they do know it, they're still likely to use these stupid polls when forming an opinion.
When teenagers buy some stock and talk it up in chat rooms before dumping it, they get in trouble even though the rumors they spread obviously have no statistical validity. Most people are innumerate and don't base their buying decisions on statistically valid information. They're influenced by stupid stuff like online polls and rumors. Part of the blame lies with zdnet for running a stupid online poll like this one. Their crime is laziness- a good poll is more work and takes more time. Easier to throw a stupid script on the site and see what happens. But most of the blame belongs squarely on the people at MS who tampered with the information.
This poll wasn't something like "Who's your favorite Spice Girl?". Its intended audience is the clueless IT guy who's got a limited budget and is faced with a decision on whether to use MS or non-MS technology for a given project. The only conceivable purpose of the poll manipulation was to sway these people. How is pumping up a worthless stock any worse than pumping up a worthless technology?
Web polls are inherently untrustworthy. Everyone knows this. No big deal.
You and your friends know this. Lots of people don't. I would even say that the people most likely to be swayed by this poll are the ones who control the largest amounts of technology spending.
... is if the "PLEASE STOP AND VOTE FOR .NET" had been distributed through an Outlook virus. Then, I'd've died laughing.
sarchasm: The gulf between the author of sarcastic wit and the person who doesn't get it.
Well, there was a study several years ago that concluded that, under some situations, driving was safer than flying.
I turned out that the study was paid for by the auto companies, and that 'some situations' meant very short trips. (I guess it does seem reasonable that it's safer to drive to the local grocery store than to fly there.)
Sorta OT, but along the same lines. Last week I used someone else's login/pw to access the SourceSafe server, and completely rewrote this guy's code, commented it just like he does, and followed a completely different method. Today was the review, and everyone brought cameras, like I'd asked them to. Teehee.
LV
Woot w00t w007.
To most PHBs this would be considered big news that Microsoft intentionally tried to alter an online poll. Just because "we" know how they have behaived badly before doesnt meen that the PHBs do. Most of them are just aware of what the MS salesperson tells them when he visit their company. No sane person would let MS into their company if the knew what they wore locking themswlves into and just how low MS seems to be willing to go in their marketing and sales efforts. Im not biased, just well informed after 20 years in computers.
HTTP/1.1 400
they should have taken advantage of their own users inability to apply security patches and made a worm to go out and vote from them. at least it wouldn't have seemed so suspect... that is until their worm is so effective that they effectively get all the votes.
-- john
Here's what we make:
One daemon that will be fed with desirable options for online polls by some lucky geek. Maybe we'll make a slashdot like moderating system so that we'll reduce the obvious potential for abuse.
One debian package that will contain a client to the daemon.
The client will automatically contact the daemon and request an url. It gets the url, casts its vote and stores the url. Next time cron activates it, it will get a different url, and if it gets the same, it'll ask again up to three times.
Folks, this scheme can be done easily and somewhat securely. I'm quite sure quite a few geeks would run it if it was Yet Another Deb.
Is it ethical? Practical? Needed? (one question is rethorical)
Stop the brainwash
So, I'm off-topic. So then, where does one make suggestions about the system itself without getting karma punched by 'Offtopic' happy moderators?
Geez...
Please mod this post only if you think others should/n't read this. I have enough ego^H^H^Hkarma. Thanks!
Are you 200 people who will be implementing .net(like the one person who tried to vote 200 times)? Are you an automated script(Like the one that was detected voting from the microsoft.com domain)? If ZDnet accuses microsoft of cheating, you'd better read the article and realize that they were actually cheating. The article wouldn't exist if every developer in the company had come in and voted once, but they didn't. They obviously cheated.
It's been a long time.
When Time Magazine noticed us folks at Georgia Tech were stuffing the ballot box trying to get George P. Burdell named Person of the Year, they removed all the votes for him.
.NET.
I think that's sufficient precedent to remove all the votes for
-JDF
1) The name "Emmanuel Goldstein" comes from the novel "1984". Since you apparently haven't read it, you should.
.NET? I forget.
;-)
I get the idea of 1984. We are all under the gov't control. They watch us through the TV. Someone throws a hammer through a TV... then the Mac goes no where.
Wasn't it about
Believe it or not, there were things going on in the world before 1999!
What?
Of course... my parents for one.
Get your Unix fortune now!
We need a new setting for our friend/foe lists...
Exactly. If this kind of thing didn't matter, then Microsoft wouldn't have cared if anyone voted for .NET or not. They obviously DO care so there must be something to the polls in people's minds...
If Microsofts offcial stockholder statments discuss .Net as a future segment of their profit stategy, shouldn't the SEC investigate this a a possible fraud on the stockholders?
Don't people go to jail for fradulent websites artifically boosting a companies outlook? Don't people go to jail for defacing say CNN? Is this better or worse for Microsoft because they manipulated another companies site rather than generating their own?
Novel theory: Modern Man evolved from psychopath
OK, so at least some users cheated and voted more than once. But its doubtful that upper management directed the cheating or would have even condoned it, as obvious cheating would only apply more tarnish to Microsofts reputation.
As far as I'm concerned, unless the poll specified that Microsoft employees were ineligible to vote, its a valid win, even if 95 percent of the respondents came from the microsoft.com domain.
No, Thursday's out. How about never - is never good for you?
They knew Microsoft stuffed the ballot box right? That would suggest they keep web logs. All they have to do is hack out a little script to dig through the logs and subtract a vote from MS's count for every vote from microsoft.com. Presto, ballot stuff reversed. (A bit crude but you get the idea...)
You lucky bastard! I get butkiss! I get troll ratings. Ahh, this is weird. I am beginning to wonder if the moderation system isn't susceptible to "waves" of moderations. Something. *sigh*. You know, I come to /. for the posts. There are many really intelligent people here, but man... they are gonna bolt if this keeps up. Maybe I'm over reacting but the M$ plants are really annoying. Their posts are like reading molasses.
Therefore, we could conclude that people were paid to vote on MSs behalf.
.net programming department could have gotten this ball rolling with almost no effort, using their own adress books. Simple lemming psychology, a 'forward this to everyone' line in the email, and corporate conformity does the rest. I've seen it happen within my industry, (which is non tech BTW), as well as on endless newsgroups, forums, etc... Here on Slashdot, it's even got a nickname, The Slashdot effect.
We could indeed conclude that, if we are in the habit of drawing conclusions from evidence so slender it's all but non-existent.
Sorry, but I don't buy it. There's no evidence that anyone was paid, or that there was any concerted effort, or that their was any conspiracy. Yes, the votes originated from a microsoft.com account, yes emails appear to have originated from a microsoft.com account, no there is no evidence of 'official' action.
Three guys from the
I guess what I'd argue ethics wise is whether its right for the employees for the company creating the product should vote to say "I'm using the product its cool". On one hand it is a whole bunch of people that ARE implementing .NET products. On the other hand its 1 single company implementing all those projects.
Not that I will defend MS on the ethics front here because they were trying to boost the score for .NET. I don't know that I'd go so far as to say they rigged the vote. There are 40,000 MS employees many of which who are extremely loyal to the company who would vote from inside the MS firewall. All of those votes would be routed through the proxies so all 40,000 votes from independant people would actually look like they came from a few hundred IP's.
"You can now flame me, I am full of love,"
Hey, ZD has added a warning now! Which means they get their news from /. ?! Shouldn't there be another warning about that, too? ;
"with their freedom lost all virtue lose" - Milton
is at unhelpful.org.
c tion=view
"Do you vote in web polls?"
Answer options:
"yes"
The results: http://www.unhelpful.org/cgi/vote.cgi?name=vote&a
What we call folk wisdom is often no more than a kind of expedient stupidity.-Edward Abbey
I rather hope they don't. Part of me hopes that a company so lame as to engineer a product like Exchange (that here at least has proved their undoing) won't get smart, that it will be this easy to fend them off in the future.
Part of me fears I may be wrong in harboring that hope.
Mene, Mene, Tekel, Upharsin, Bill. My concern is how many you will take with you before you go.
--
And in the end, reality always tends to hit theory hard in the face when you least expect it.
-- Linus Torvalds
That Windows would be absolutely bullet proof and nobody would own a copy of it. Some other company would be selling mildly deffective software, and would be slowly driving Microsoft out of business through a series of orchestrated incompatibilities between the products.
Say, what you will but ubiquity is the trump card in OS's. People can learn to adapt to crashes, bugs, worms, and all the other chaos that ensues because of Microsoft's focus. But it's hard to argue that having software that works on 90% of computers is rather handy.
This sig has been temporarily disconnected or is no longer in service
"when people click there from a Microsoft Exchange email message, Exchange helpfully gives us the subject line and username."
This bothers me far more than the "poll fixing" Do people realize that this kind of information is leaking all over the net? Is there a way to disable this "feature"?
"This whole thing is wildly inaccurate. Rounding errors, ballot stuffers, dynamic IPs, firewalls. If you're using these numbers to do anything important, you're insane. "
(Slashdot)
As an on-line poll, this is both silly and trivial. The problem comes when there's a context shift.
If this poll is removed from the web and placed at the side of a fancy brochure, it will look respectable. You may well need to read the small print, or even check the bibliography, to find that the source was a web-based poll. And yet no fraud would, technically, be involved. That's what the poll did report.
So this is useable outside the context where it originates, and with the original context not being clearly obvious.
If you wish to say that this practice is not new, I will agree with you. But it is a frequently effective approach that is done because it usually works, and because those who do happen to check up on it will consider it silly more than criminal. I presume that it isn't technically fraud, because it is done frequently. And that's my only reason.
.
I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
Crispin
----
Crispin Cowan, Ph.D.
Chief Scientist, WireX Communications, Inc.
Immunix: Security Hardened Linux Distribution
Available for purchase
Before breaking out the nooses and rounding up suspects let's consider for a moment that this, and other instances, are not the result of an executive order from the big fraud himself (Balmer), but the work of loyal employees (minions)
Under either scenario it's a PR ding for Microsoft. Look for their deflector shields to be raised (spin-meisters, obfuscators, trolls) to preserve the untarnished image of the company (recently found guilty of being an evil monopolist, which is just fine with the current administration's cabinet.)
In all fairness, there's probably hoards of OpenSource advocates, Linux faithful, or just hackers, who would do the same thing if there were a ZD uk poll on best operating system.
Ok, now you can bust out the ropes and round up suspects, because they're likely guilty of something anyway.
A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
If you're going to stuff ballots properly you need loads of IP addresses. Imagine all those insecure IIS systems voting against .NET! That would make a much better story when they worked out what was going on.
Boffoonery - downloadable Comedy Benefit for Bletchley Park
Is it ethical? Practical? Needed? (one question is rethorical)
Practical maybe, but neither needed nor ethical. We'd only go down to the same level. It's not the first time Microsoft had tried to bias an "independent survey", and this has already had some effect of a loss in credibility in the public. Be honest - if you saw the poll on ZDnet, would you really think of anyone to believe the result being the true and neutral opinion of ZDnet readers?
It took a lot of time and was a great effort for GNU/Linux, Free Software and the Open Source Initiative to gain today's amount of credibility and momentum. It was credibility which made it possible for GNU/Linux not only to be considered as a serious competitor against Unix, but in many cases as the only potential competitor against Microsoft, and the only way to escape a 100%-Microsoft-dominated world. Exactly that is what the PR people at Microsoft know, and it's what they want to combat - by Microsoft's rules if we consider to play the game with them.
So little could be more stupid than sacrificing much credibility by manipulating a public opinion poll or doing other unfair things which we don't find tolerable even if done by Microsoft. You're right with your statement that Microsoft's biasing of public surveys and polls can't be tolerated. But it won't change the fact that our rigging of public surveys and polls wouldn't be tolerated either.
My point is simple. Look at it the sequence of events:
Now, if you're ZDNet, what do you do? Do you pull the poll, admit that your polls are deeply flawed, and either fix the problem or cease doing them? Or do you toss up a headline that says "Microsoft rigged this poll, which means the topic is an important one, aren't we smart for hitting on it"?
The story ZDNet did on this poll deflects attention entirely from the question of the validity of their polls and thus, ZDNet's credibility as an information source. That is the very definition of 'spin'.
Look around you. There are a few people here saying "Well, online polls are crap anyway", but the overwhelming majority are talking about Microsoft's rigging the poll. The fact is, though, it was an ill-conceived, useless poll to begin with, as all ZDNet polls inherently are.
Microsoft clearly is at fault here, but the sidestepping by ZDNet is no less sleazy, in light of their supposed purpose.
I could critise Microsoft over this (but this is probably just a few odd employees who did this), but then I'd be a hypocrite because I have participated in ballot stuffing before.
About two months ago, Entertainment Weekly did a poll on Entertainer of the year. It was soon posted on Fark and then slowly migrated itself to the Something Awful forums. Now, we decided to ballot stuff it with "Richard "Lowtax" Kyanka" due to the fact that they didn't have any sort of security method to stop people from doing multiple votes.
It soon became a battle when the Shack News forums and some other forum started a battle with us. So we then got cocky and wrote various scripts in langauges varying from Perl to JavaScript (I wrote a script in mIRC considering I wanted to write it in a small bit of time). From all of our efforts, Lowtax got over 500,000 votes.
Yes, Lowtax was on top, but then they took the site down and then reopened it with a security measure and a little comment in the webpage taunting us. A few weeks later the results came out and I am not sure who got into the Top 10, but Lowtax and Something Awful DID get a mention in an article they wrote later.
If I hadn't done that, I'd be saying things differently here.
...or suffering from severe schizophrenia; and all working on the same project.
Well, I try to innovate where I can :-)
Don't you mean Microsoft didn't do anything *illegal*?
No, I really mean that I think they didn't do anything wrong, given the nature of web polls. I'll try to explain:
If I insult you and tell you lies, I have done nothing illegal, but does that make it right?
Technically, that is a crime - at least if you do it in public. People get sued for it all the time. Look up the terms "slander" and "defamation of character" sometime.
Microsoft has clearly violated the intent of this poll. If Sun had done the same thing, you know Microsoft would be howling for blood.
What evidence do you have that Sun didn't try to rig the poll? Or that somebody at ZDNet didn't "adjust" the results to make them look more interesting? For that matter, what evidence can you offer that any of the votes were cast by somebody who actually builds software for a living? There simply isn't any evidence to be had re: the validity of the results...
And that's my whole point. From the perspective of an end-user of the poll data, the results are essentially random (in that they have no correlation to what the poll purports to "measure"). If my reputation, or the reputation of my company or its products might be harmed by the results of one of these polls, then I should do whatever I can to ensure a good outcome. An argument could be made that for a public company like Microsoft, that they have an obligation to the shareholders to do these sorts of things.
I do believe that the situation is quite different in the case of scientifically conducted surveys. But a web-poll is one step above graffiti on a wall in terms of scientific rigor.
My preferred solution would actually be to have a rational discussion with the various "news" sites about why these kinds of polls do more harm than good, or about ways to encourage more accurate data collection. However, I really doubt they'd be interested, since they have no vested interest in getting accurate results.
This is disinformation, plain and simple.
If there was any information content to be had from the poll, I'd agree. Given that there isn't, it's hard to argue that the final results are any more "disinforming" than the results before the "tampering".
I know that I will never buy any software written by Mark Bessey.
Oh well. I guess I'll just have to live with that. On the other hand, since you apparently base your purchasing decisions on ZDNet's user polls, that's probably not much of a loss, anyway. :-)
-Mark
I heard a report that microsoft is innocent!
Apparently, the same dead guys that sent the DOJ letters have whipped up some jscript and vbscript to throw off the zdnet poll!
This proves 2 things:
1) Microsoft isn't the devil (or presumably they would be controlling the undead).
2) The undead can't resist a good prank!
And while I agree that the manager who makes the boneheaded decision to use X based on an online poll deserves something nasty
I don't think most people really decide to use X. It's big and slow and it's a bitch to program. OTOH it's what comes with Unix.
Perhaps the iMac article is their way of apologizing to M$. "Look, we're sorry, we didn't really mean it: of course you can do whatever you want with your holy VBScripts." :)
my old sig used to be funny, but then slashcode ate it and now it's not funny anymore
Many people are paid to read /. - it's just that their PHBs haven't realized this fact yet :)
my old sig used to be funny, but then slashcode ate it and now it's not funny anymore
that's pretty damn funny. You can add every SUV to that list, except for maybe over-priced range rovers.
Banks do not behave like this. (Disclaimer: IANAB)
Anyone who wants to manage all of this data. Good idea to stay far, far away. If your bank suddenly starts wanting personal data that it does not need, it's time to find another bank.
Banks deal in areas where they really need to stay above suspicion.
Slashdot has only as much of my private data as I choose to make public. This exclude things like purchasing habits and credit card details. Further the posts are points that are made in the context at the time, and do not even necessarily express the opinions of the poster.
rofl :D
Execute? [Y/N] _
(Note: I'm not positive this guy is from Microsoft, but for the hell of it I'll assume he is. A disproportionately high number of Microsoft employees are bound to be reading this thread in any case- unless they're all at "backslashdot.org".)
.NET is to make Java irrelevant. Even you seem to be convinced Java is already dead.
.NET, the point seems to be creating a copy of Java with a 1-to-1 mapping to every concept in it- from the JVM ("CLR") on up to the language itself. This fits the standard MS pattern; every technology Microsoft has ever produced is an incompatible imitation of an existing successful technology. Java might not be the best technology; in fact it has some real flaws- but it's successful, so you've copied it, flaws and all. Except you aren't calling it Java, you're calling it something else- because dammit, if people aren't going to let you royally screw something up with your "innovation", you're just going to go off and play with your own toys! Funny how you make the C# to Java migration path so short. I'm sure I could learn all the differences between C# and Java in twenty minutes. In fact, I'm sure someone could write a book "C# for Java programmers" with ten pages in it, that I could finish on the toilet in one sitting. I'm not going to bother. I remember all too well the stunts you played, how you refused to support standard APIs and kept coming out with your own oddball Windows-only crap, how you made my programs not work unless I wrote MS and non-MS versions of everything. Now all of a sudden you're going to make it easy for me? Screw you. You've completely alienated all your target developers. Now nobody trusts you.
What kind of Enterprise or large business consults Internet Polls for business decision-making?
You'd be surprised. People get promoted until they reach a level at which they're incompetent. They have no idea what they should be doing. They're too scared to ask anyone what technology is appropriate for their situation, because that would reveal their incompetency. They want someone to tell them what to do. They desperately want to know what everyone else is doing, and what everyone else is going to be doing in five years. They hunger for safe decisions. They fall for FUD tactics easily. Why do you think so many shops use things like VB, ASP, and IIS? Being (obviously) from Microsoft, you must surely appreciate the tactical advantages to be gained from marketing your products to such people. Stop acting like they don't exist; they're your bread and butter.
You too are considering MS was acting as a collective... where do you stand on the bogey man and the tooth fairy?
Ummm, it really doesn't matter whether the rigging was done by MS as a "collective" or by individual idiots at MS forwarding parameterized URLs to each other. What really stands out to most observers is the way you're always faithful to your stereotype, whether you're acting as a single company or a collection of individuals. The fact is that you fools got caught rigging a poll, and your own poorly-designed technology is what gave you away! Now you have egg on your face, and everyone's opinion of you has been reaffirmed yet again.
The whole point of
Well, you could say the whole point of any Microsoft technology is to make non-Microsoft technologies "irrelevant". In the case of
I'll only learn C# when I'm forced to use it, most likely by some middle management bonehead who's seen a rigged poll.
I'm suprised by the people who think just that. A lot of people, even(or especially...) on slashdot seem to think we hate and deride them because they are rich or something. It sort of scares me because they are also the ones who often carry the microsoft company line(cmon, notice how few people have counter arguements for our problems with MS until MS provides one?).
It's been a long time.
Haha!
:)
Linux on the Desktop will be the most signifigant technology in 2002, completely surpassing Web Services, wireless, DSL and other things people actually use.
http://polls.zdnet.co.uk/zdnuk/?p=25&d=O
Let me guess, you always vote for that Cowboy Neal character?
Why is there an overwhelming sentiment here of "It happens all the time, so Microsoft can't be wrong". This is sad and childish rubbish.
Lying and cheating is still wrong, whether a lot of people are doing it or not. There are still notions of personal and corporate responsibility, and I would hope that we are not so jaded as to think they are impossible to achieve or meaningless.
It would be heartening if people used their discussion energy to encourage other people to ACT BETTER and treat each other with respect and honesty. . . people don't need encouragement the other way.
If a corporation (or a person for that matter) is spending time lying and cheating your fellow citizens, call them on the carpet. . . don't try to justify it !@&?
Waves. Yes. Dunno if it's the script or something else with the timing. /. seems to me to be more like following a soap opera than anything like dutifully following the news.
.... painful slow.
/. is the best available resource for dealing with Microsoft worms/viruses/etc, for those of us still using the stuff. Response time is like hours compared to Microsoft's days.
.NET.
There was a time many months back when the ms-bashing leads were posted shortly after the astroturfers had gone beddy-bye. Fun.
The M$ plants remind me of Iraq's ambassador to the UN during the Gulf War. Sounds like it should mean something but
M$ has a problem with damage control. At this point,
I don't think the intelligent people will bolt. The mass of moldering molasses of microsoft minions gives a preview of the morass known as
It once affected Mozilla and once affected Netscape 4 too.
Webmail suffers from leaving delicious referers in my log files. I couldn't find any [Netscape 4 style] mailbox:// urls in my referer logs sorry, but I have seen them before.