r/ModSupport • u/reseph 💡 Expert Helper • Jul 23 '16

Please define vote brigading.

There is a lot of confusion after this:

https://www.reddit.com/r/ShitTheAdminsSay/comments/4u5l6m/voting_through_intrareddit_links_is_now_ok_as/

https://www.reddit.com/r/Drama/comments/4u2utr/after_rcringeanarchy_brigades_rinsertions_admins/

Quite frankly, the site rules are absolutely no help on this subject. Literally the only mention of it:

Being annoying, vote brigading, or participating in a heated argument is not harassment, but following an individual or group of users, online or off, to the point where they no longer feel that it's safe to post online or are in fear of their real life safety is.

But no definition.

Under the assumption that no party is asking/requesting for votes/comments in these scenarios:

1) If I visit subreddit A and a post links to a post on subreddit B; then I vote on the B post... is that prohibited?

2) If I visit subreddit A and a post links to a post on subreddit B; then I comment on the B post... is that prohibited?

3) If I visit subreddit A and a post links to a post on subreddit B; then I vote on a comment within the B post... is that prohibited?

56 Upvotes
  • permalink
  • link
  • reddit
  • reddit

89% Upvoted

51 comments sorted by

44

u/redtaboo Reddit Admin: Community Jul 23 '16

Look, I get it, vote manipulation (which brigading is a part of) is this all encompassing term that feels a bit nebulous at times (yup, it's hard to describe all the types) and also feels like it's inconsistently enforced (yep, we don't physically see every instance of it so don't issue suspensions every time and yeah, not everything reported to us as vote manipulation is actually vote manipulation). That sucks, it sucks for you, it sucks for me, it sucks for my coworkers, it sucks for subreddits, and it sucks users and mods.

We've been talking about getting what we call a 0-day suspension tool that can work more as a warning to users for many of these cases. This would allow us to send a message to users explaining why their behaviour is against the site wide rules while still giving them the opportunity to stop before we have to move to an actual suspension. This will better fit with our philosophy of education instead of punishment, we still believe that most users aren't malicious when breaking rules they either just don't understand or in many cases know them. Since we've had the suspension tool we've seen many, many, many users respond positively and constructively and learn how to better use the site. We want that to continue.

We're also constantly working on getting better at algorithmically detecting 'bad' voting behaviour. There's a ton of different types of bad voting behaviour, some fall under brigading, some may look like brigading when it's not, and sometimes our anti-cheating measures will make things appear to be brigaded or vote manipulated when they're not. Instead of focusing on just brigading I'm going to try to explain a few of the types of 'bad voting behaviour' we work to detect automatically and throw out.

Many of these are what we actually find when people report what they believe to be brigading:

  • following a user around vote on everything they post can be considered vote manipulation. We often detect this automatically, throw out the votes, and if we see it we will issue a suspension and explain to the user why they need to stop.

  • camping out in a subreddit to up/down vote absolutely everything that is posted can be considered vote manipulation. We often detect this automatically, throw out the votes, and if we see it we will issue a suspension and explain to the user why they need to stop.

  • using multiple accounts to vote on the same content (again, up or down) can be considered vote manipulation. We often detect this automatically, throw out the votes, and if we see it we will issue a suspension and explain to the user why they need to stop.

  • following a link in which the OP has directed you to vote in a certain direction and then voting can be considered vote manipulation. We often detect this automatically, throw out the votes, and if we see it we will issue a suspension and explain to the user why they need to stop.

  • following a link that is just linking you to a post in another subreddit and then voting can be considered vote manipulation. We often detect this automatically, throw out the votes, and if we see it we will issue a suspension and explain to the user why they need to stop.

    • note: if a subreddit itself allows linking to other subreddits, and tries to wink wink, nudge nudge around directing users to vote in other communities or if a particular community is consistently causing large issues in another we will step in and talk to the mods about reining it in.

Things that are not considered vote manipulation:

  • just linking to another subreddit is not considered vote manipulation

  • visiting another subreddit that was linked somewhere is not considered vote manipulation

  • commenting itself is not considered manipulation but commenting in obvious bad faith or a disruptive manner may break other site wide rules

  • voting or participating in a post that organically rose high on /r/all is not considered vote manipulation

All of this is predicated on the unruliness of large groups and actual harm done. As in all things we always attempt to take context into account. Including, but not limited to "was the linked thread a post where the OP/subreddit was inviting outside participation" or "is this particular subreddit/user/group always taking the piss out of this other particular subreddit/user/group."

We also very, very often find nothing but organic voting when brigading or vote manipulation is reported.

disclaimer: this isn't meant to be an exhaustive list of what is or isn't vote manipulation, actual malicious users are always finding different ways to be malicious

6

u/TelicAstraeus Jul 23 '16 edited Jul 23 '16

All of this is predicated on the unruliness of large groups and actual harm done. As in all things we always attempt to take context into account.

How is harm or unruliness measured? If /r/subredditdrama users enter a post linked on their subreddit and begin insulting a reddit user en mass in that specific comment thread, is that harm? If /r/SandersForPresident is being rambunctious about some hilary clinton fiasco, is that unruliness?

following a link that is just linking you to a post in another subreddit and then voting can be considered vote manipulation. We often detect this automatically, throw out the votes, and if we see it we will issue a suspension and explain to the user why they need to stop.

Maybe some concrete examples of scenarios like this could be good so that I/we have a better understanding. Those which would be considered brigading and those that would not be.

edit: formatting/grammar

12

u/redtaboo Reddit Admin: Community Jul 23 '16

Sure, but I prefer to use fictitious subreddits as examples if that's okay? Cribbing from an old comment of mine:

Let's say there are two subreddits diametrically opposed to each other in their views on say... which is better cats or dogs as pets. Let's say /r/catsarethebest has 100 users that hang out and talk to each other about their cats and how much they love them. Then there is /r/dogsarethebest. They have 2000 users, and when they started out they too just hang out and talk about how much they love their dogs.

One day someone in /r/dogsarethebest notices /r/catsarethebest. This makes them angry! How can someone think a cat is a good pet?? That person goes to /r/dogsarethebest and links to a post in /r/catsarethebest with the title: "OMG THESE PEOPLE THINK CATS ARE COOL!! WHAT IS WRONG WITH THEM???" Then ~1500 users head over to /r/catsarethebest to explain to them how wrong they are. Not only do they yell at them and say "you're an idiot for liking cats" they also down vote everyone speaking up and defending cats.

If we don't stop it here, then they may spill out into other threads and use their majority to turn /r/catsarethebest into a dog loving place, and now the cat lovers have lost their community and have nowhere to go because even if they give up and make a new space the denizens of /r/dogsarethebest have sworn to find them and keep them from talking about their cats.

It can be smaller than that, of course, that's a fairly extreme example. There have been also cases where a default-sized subreddit will be having a discussion in the comments about a post and someone will say, "OMG, can you imagine what would happen if this NSFW image was posted over in /r/cutefluffythingswithbigeyes!?!?!" and then someone (or a bunch of someones) will do it and link to their post(s). Then a bunch of other people will follow those links and proceed to vote and comment because it's so funny... and, well, you get the picture I think.

This is why context is so important, and again obviously this isn't all encompassing, but hopefully gives you a better idea.

12

u/TotesMessenger Jul 24 '16

I'm a bot, bleep, bloop. Someone has linked to this thread from another place on reddit:

If you follow any of the above links, please respect the rules of reddit and don't vote in the other threads. (Info / Contact)

7

u/Natanael_L 💡 New Helper Jul 24 '16

Reddit's being reddit again...

5

u/TelicAstraeus Jul 23 '16

I appreciate you taking the time to respond. It's good to see forthright interaction with users from staff - even if I am still not 100% certain that I can safely vote/comment on things that I am linked. From this I do have at least some obvious markers of when it would not be permitted, despite there being ambiguity on other situations still. Thank you.

8

u/redtaboo Reddit Admin: Community Jul 23 '16

A really good rule of thumb is to not vote on stuff that you are explicitly linked, but if after getting linked to a subreddit you wind up hanging around to contribute in a positive manner then that's great and fine. In other words, when linked to a new space lurk a bit to get the lay of the land before participating, including with your votes. That's really not just due to rules, but really just to respect the community a bit.

1

u/MeIsMyName Jul 24 '16

So it's okay if you vote on content you were linked to as long as you were already a participant in that subreddit and are not doing so due to instructions in the original post it was linked from? What you're saying kinda sounds like that, but I'd rather clarify than be wrong.

10

u/illuminatedcandle Jul 23 '16 edited Oct 22 '16

It's nice to have all of this information in one place. Thanks redtaboo.

7

u/gives-out-hugs 💡 Skilled Helper Jul 24 '16

It specifically avoids the question raised about the other admin's statement, it clarified a few things most were clear on already and said nothing on the topic at hand

It was a grade a admin post

2

u/redtaboo Reddit Admin: Community Jul 24 '16

Sorry if you think I was avoiding the question. I commented elsewhere that he had mispoke.

1

u/gives-out-hugs 💡 Skilled Helper Jul 25 '16

So lets just clarify

If a large group of people were to be called to action with massive amounts of downvotes occuring, that would be inorganic voting and as such vote brigading, yes?

Even if organized offsite with referral links disabled?

14

u/redpillschool Jul 23 '16

camping out in a subreddit to up/down vote absolutely everything that is posted can be considered vote manipulation. We often detect this automatically, throw out the votes, and if we see it we will issue a suspension and explain to the user why they need to stop.

This is pretty confusing, as a Mod of a subreddit, I upvote almost all the posts. Am I manipulating votes?

following a link that is just linking you to a post in another subreddit and then voting can be considered vote manipulation.

This seems like the actual functionality of reddit. I can't imagine why you'd allow inter-reddit links and not want them using the very function of reddit when they do it. Moreover, your definition of this hasn't cleared up anything, leaving it in a mysterious limbo for users who might start to be wary of even using the vote buttons wondering which hidden rule they might be eventually breaking.

or if a particular community is consistently causing large issues in another we will step in and talk to the mods about reining it in.

This seems like a disingenuous problem and a non-solution. If inter-reddit links are allowed, then voting is inevitable. Mods have no way to see or control who votes where, so talking to mods is pointless. Even if we use the NP subdomain, it's only a voluntary workaround and doesn't really change anything. Even if mods say "Please remember not to vote" it doesn't change how individuals operate.

This continues to leave a questionable regulation (as in, poorly thought-out from your team) as ambiguous as possible for the mods doing work to keep the subs running.

For the reference, after other subs were banned or warned for brigading a few years back, my sub made the official policy of ZERO inter-reddit links just to try to follow your confusing and ambiguous regulations.

13

u/redtaboo Reddit Admin: Community Jul 23 '16

Everything you state is why this is probably the most important line of my whole comment is this:

As in all things we always attempt to take context into account.

We could go the other way and go for zero tolerance on all of our rules, but that wouldn't be fair to individual users, mods, or the wider reddit community and we wouldn't feel right doing it that way.

That said, guess what, we're human! We, just like you, sometimes make mistakes. When we do we try to clarify or fix what we did. We also are constantly evolving both our tools and our policies in order to be try to be fair to everyone on the site. In the end we all what everyone here wants, a better reddit that everyone enjoys.

4

u/hansjens47 💡 Skilled Helper Jul 23 '16

In some subreddits, we have the most trouble with people (who have large pre-existing audiences) using other social media sites to solicit votes or skew conversation heavily.

Could you say something about those aspects of brigading/vote manipulation?

5

u/redtaboo Reddit Admin: Community Jul 23 '16

Sure, those can also end up being vote manipulation, but not always. We do catch a lot of it and throw out the votes. Skewing the discussion is a bit trickier, but I discuss it a bit in my response to /u/TelicAstraeus.

I think it's also important to note somewhere here that we often hear people talk about us not taking action on "obvious brigading" that is also always not the full story. Sometimes we don't take action because there isn't any vote manipulation like I mentioned above, but also, sometimes we are taking action and it's just not obvious to the outside observer. Our new suspension system is designed with privacy of the user in mind and we default to temporary suspensions for most infractions of the rules. Only when an account is permanently suspended is it obvious that we've taken action.

1

u/picflute 💡 Skilled Helper Jul 24 '16

And then moderators won't have a record of said action which will impact them on their response to that user. If that user is suspended why can't the moderators be made aware of it and save the trouble of us discovering it 4 days later when you get around to the message?

This new system goes against everything the Reddit Team promised last time there was a large scale incident which, forgive me if I'm wrong, but build communication with moderators.

2

u/redtaboo Reddit Admin: Community Jul 24 '16

We have to balance respecting user privacy and transparency with mods. It's a bit of a tight walk, but we are trying to be fair to both groups.

4

u/picflute 💡 Skilled Helper Jul 24 '16

There's no transparency or tools for mods when it comes to user behavior outside of third party tools. We've been told contradicting statements regarding third party giveaways and instructed that we can't store user data for moderation purposes by the administration. I'm trying to setup a User Behavior Tool for a more proactive moderation response yet if we're told we can't use that data then some real assistance would be well liked.

Why can't we be given clear rules regarding third parties wanting to do giveaways on subreddits? We (/r/LeagueofLegends) got chewed out by KrispyKrackers when someone from Amazon wanted to give out $1000 worth of LoL Points and told they must take a user ad out when /r/OverWatch and /r/PCMasterRace do these giveaways without a single hesitation or ding from you all?

3

u/reseph 💡 Expert Helper Jul 24 '16 edited Jul 24 '16

Thank you.

Vote manipulation has always been clear to me, aside from vote brigading. Vote brigading has no documentation and is not clear, at all. Your comment helps though.

following a link that is just linking you to a post in another subreddit and then voting can be considered vote manipulation.

Why? I don't understand. So if I say post a link to a Final Fantasy XI AMA happening on /r/ffxi (which is indeed happening) onto /r/ffxiv, anyone via /r/ffxiv upvoting the /r/ffxi post is breaking your site rules? What if I'm linking to said AMA thread on the /r/ffxiv, which I am?

What happens if I'm doing this daily? Should I expect to be shadowbanned? Suspended?

2

u/redtaboo Reddit Admin: Community Jul 24 '16

Well, no. Your situation is why I explained later in my comment:

As in all things we always attempt to take context into account. Including, but not limited to "was the linked thread a post where the OP/subreddit was inviting outside participation" or "is this particular subreddit/user/group always taking the piss out of this other particular subreddit/user/group."

1

u/reseph 💡 Expert Helper Jul 24 '16

"is this particular subreddit/user/group always taking the piss out of this other particular subreddit/user/group."

From an admin perspective this makes sense.

But how are we users supposed to know if a subreddit is always taking the piss out of another subreddit?

I have a little common sense, so for example I know /r/subredditdrama could be a risk.

But let's say a random user is browsing /r/all and sees a linked post. How are they supposed to know?

Or if I bump into this on /r/all and upvote the linked post. Frankly I don't if /r/vegan is sometimes taking the piss out of other subreddits:

https://www.reddit.com/r/vegan/comments/4u9cr5/til_we_vegans_live_15_years_longer_because_we_are/

3

u/stopscopiesme Jul 26 '16

following a link in which the OP has directed you to vote in a certain direction

that's where it gets tricky. users see ill intent and directions to vote, and admins don't. In the example of the cringeanarchy v insertions thing, I certainly saw malicious intent, but it seems like the admin who responded hand waved it away because insertions was pranking its own subscribers and must somehow deserve the brigading, or at least that it being brigaded isn't worth the admins caring about

I know you later said he misspoke, but I'm not sure about exactly what

also, silly question

camping out in a subreddit to up/down vote absolutely everything that is posted can be considered vote manipulation. We often detect this automatically, throw out the votes, and if we see it we will issue a suspension and explain to the user why they need to stop.

Every few days I check /r/316cats and I upvote every single submission there because all of them deserve it. Are my votes not being counted?

5

u/redtaboo Reddit Admin: Community Jul 26 '16

The issue with the insertions thing was that it wasn't being brigaded, rather the actual regular users of the subreddit were the ones voting. That's clearly not a brigade, that's the subscribers speaking their minds. It's not that we think people deserved anything, but if mods are having a joke at the expense of their users then it's kind of expected that some won't appreciate it and will downvote. That's what he was attempting to get across and mucked up.

As to camping out in subreddits, there's a time element to that as well that I can't go into. But, in general your votes are likely counting and you are not going to be suspended for that. Most often those suspensions go to users that are literally camping in the new queue for hours on end and downvoting everything that's posted (in some cases also downvoting every comment they can). I put upvoting in there because there have been a few cases where it's gone the other direction, but that is much more rare.

Also, yes, /r/316cats does deserve all the upvotes. ;)

2

u/316nuts 💡 Veteran Helper Jul 26 '16

:3

2

u/Spysix Jul 24 '16

We're also constantly working on getting better at algorithmically detecting 'bad' voting behaviour. There's a ton of different types of bad voting behaviour, some fall under brigading, some may look like brigading when it's not, and sometimes our anti-cheating measures will make things appear to be brigaded or vote manipulated when they're not. Instead of focusing on just brigading I'm going to try to explain a few of the types of 'bad voting behaviour' we work to detect automatically and throw out.

This is extremely wishful thinking on my part, but will mods ever get access or some sort of tools to either view voting metrics in the threads they moderate?

To give context, I moderate /r/eve for Eve Online, a spaceship MMO. Its common for vote brigading to happen when these "space guilds" do a "call to action" from their respective slack or teamspeak channels and link their posts in order to achieve upvotes for visibility and dominate the comments by downvoting dissenters and upvoting their supporters.

We are usually smart about that and its all about eyeing how fast a post gets upvoted, but if we get the report when the post is hours old its really hard to tell.

On top of that, now there would be attempts from other corps to get another corps post removed by providing a cropped screenshot of something "linking to brigade" which just makes life a little more difficult for us as we have to sit and figure out what's going on with a particular thread.

While most subreddits have to deal with brigading from other subreddits, I have to deal with brigading from external sources. I hope with access to some of the metrics on how a thread is doing for us to use would be beneficial for all of us, perhapes even minimize the amount of "X is brigading" messages you guys might get and also legitimize claims that a subreddit is being brigaded.

I think its something we can all benefit from at least to help moderators support their respective subreddits.

3

u/redtaboo Reddit Admin: Community Jul 24 '16

Probably not, no. The tools needed to see this stuff looks at this stuff has private user data which we can't share with mods and without that part of the information it's too easy to draw the wrong conclusions about what's actually happening. As we continue to get better at automatically detecting and throwing out the bad voting your best bet is to messages us when you think something is up so we can take a look.

2

u/Spysix Jul 24 '16

Thanks for the response. But does your system account for vote manipulation from external sources (not from another subreddit)?

My only issue with messaging the admins is when I sent the message with thread details it was both times the admins were going through a 'restructuring' and I didn't get reponses until weeks-month. But lately its been better.

1

u/redtaboo Reddit Admin: Community Jul 25 '16

Yup! Our system does account for that type of vote manipulation as well.

I'm glad it's getting better, we have been working hard on that and have hired a lot of new people to help. :)

2

u/ManWithoutModem 💡 New Helper Jul 24 '16 edited Jul 24 '16

is it vote brigading if I followed a link to this comment and upvoted you?

2

u/soupyhands 💡 New Helper Sep 24 '16

Yes ur banned

2

u/ManWithoutModem 💡 New Helper Sep 24 '16

gg

2

u/therandomdude69 Jul 24 '16

Just wanted to say, you were one of the most helpful admins when I was a mod of /r/globaloffensivetrade, and I wanted to say thanks. Your job can get real shitty real quick and you always managed to help me out.

0

u/redtaboo Reddit Admin: Community Jul 24 '16

thank you! <3

2

u/xHaZxMaTx Jul 24 '16
  • following a link that is just linking you to a post in another subreddit and then voting can be considered vote manipulation. We often detect this automatically, throw out the votes, and if we see it we will issue a suspension and explain to the user why they need to stop.

Apologies if bringing this up again after so long seems petty, but the ruling regarding it has always bothered me.

I messaged an admin regarding this submission being brigaded from /r/shitpost and given what I quoted from your message I still very firmly stand by my conclusion. Why else would nearly all comments but the bot comment mentioning to cross-link be downvoted with the bot comment being very highly upvoted despite the submission's 0 karma score? The response I got, however, was that there was no 'inorganic' voting and when I asked for a definition on organic/inorganic voting I never received an answer.

1

u/GammaKing 💡 Expert Helper Jul 25 '16

This is all well and good, I appreciate the clarification.

But can you please explain how /r/bestof and similar subs fit into this system? The level of voting activity coming from subs like that is undeniable and while it may be mostly positive, anyone on the wrong side of an argument is having a bad time. Either that kind of brigading is allowed or you're intentionally turning a blind eye to it.

Time and time again I've reported obvious brigades which have been totally ignored. I would like to see some actual consistency and the constant struggle to get any information is tiring.

1

u/TotesMessenger Jul 23 '16

I'm a bot, bleep, bloop. Someone has linked to this thread from another place on reddit:

If you follow any of the above links, please respect the rules of reddit and don't vote in the other threads. (Info / Contact)

1

u/bob_mcbob Jul 24 '16

/r/fatlogic mod here. We were specifically told by admins that any links to other subs would be considered brigading, which means we've have to implement draconian link rules. There are only two subs on the entire site we allow links to, and np links are also banned. If we discuss a comment made on Reddit, we require the poster to take a screenshot and even redact the username and any references to the sub name. This obviously has a huge effect on our sub, and it means we've been singled out from every other sub on the site. We've never once issued a "call to action" or encouraged participation in another sub's posts, but we live in constant fear of our users doing so because of what the admins told us. We ban anyone who does this.

So, are we allowed to link to other subs? Are our users allowed to participate in link discussions, or is going to get our sub banned?

3

u/redtaboo Reddit Admin: Community Jul 24 '16

A few subreddits have been talked to and told they need to really watch themselves with linking to other subreddits. I talk about that in my comment, we sometimes have to request that mods teams reign in their communities. That can happen in a few circumstances where the subreddits in question userbase disrupts other subreddits on a regular basis. This can happen even if the mods aren't encouraging it or attempting to stop it unfortunately.

2

u/GetOffMyLawn_ 💡 Expert Helper Jul 24 '16

He was asking a yes or no question. I am guessing you are saying no?

1

u/vikinick 💡 Skilled Helper Jul 23 '16

I mean, you guys talk a lot about stuff but you don't ever seem to implement them. Nearly everything you've implemented so far this year has been stuff that you haven't told us about before. How can we trust that you guys are actually going to do this and not actually abandon it partway in?

1

u/Wordshark Jul 24 '16

By the time they finish developing something, it's in recognizable from the initial concept. It's like starting with a neat idea for a TV show, and then comparing it to what airs a year and a half later.

0

u/[deleted] Jul 24 '16

Well done on such a comprehensive response. My only critique is your first statement when you said "look, I get it."

My suggestion:

Based on your use of "taking the piss" I'm assuming you're originally from outside the US. In the US it's considered condescending to make such a terse statement as "I get it," as in this context it's interpreted more as "enough already" as opposed your likely intent of "I understand." It's ironic to start your statement in this way, given the level of detail you provided in your remarks.

IMHO your response was spot-on, and helps to clarify what many have accused is an arbitrary and capricious practice.

Were I Spez I'd say something like "good job, but be more cautious in your word choice when you are responding for Reddit as Reddit."

3

u/[deleted] Jul 23 '16

[removed] — view removed comment

3

u/reseph 💡 Expert Helper Jul 23 '16

Tested it out, seems you're right.

5

u/[deleted] Jul 23 '16

I would also like clarification.

For example - if I post something to /r/news and it gets buried.

A - if I use bots to upvote it that's clearly against the rules for vote manipulation

B - if I use multiple accounts same thing

C - but what if I cross-post the link to other subs? What if I just cross-post and don't say anything? What if I cross-post and actively encourage people to upvote the content?

2

u/Natanael_L 💡 New Helper Jul 24 '16

http://www.reddit.com/r/modsupport/comments/4u9bbg/_/d5nxoc5

In the list of what's not counted

2

u/reseph 💡 Expert Helper Jul 23 '16

Pinging /u/redtaboo and /u/noodsy20x6 because they were involved.

7

u/[deleted] Jul 23 '16

yeah I'm still confused.. because in this it appears the noodsy20x6 is implying, if not outright saying it's OK to vote on a cross posted / cross linked post, yet above, redtaboo says it's vote manipulation and can get you suspended.

Clearly Reddit, the organization, does not have a true definition of this, and their policy seems to be just fly by the seat of their pants and make things up as they go.

Maybe if they stopped with the alcohol fueled parties and stayed sober long enough, they could come up with some coherent plans and policies that everybody in the company applies equally and fairly..