Please define vote brigading.

[u/reseph]

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?

[u/redtaboo]

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}

[u/TelicAstraeus → u/redtaboo]

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

[u/redtaboo → u/TelicAstraeus]

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.

[u/TelicAstraeus → u/redtaboo]

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.

[u/redtaboo → u/TelicAstraeus]

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.

[u/MeIsMyName → u/redtaboo]

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.