Daily Kos

View Story | 188 comments

  •  LWP rules (1.50 / 48)

    #!/usr/bin/perl

use LWP;

my $browser = LWP::UserAgent->new;

my $url = "http://2004weblogawards.com/archives/000079.php";
my $response = $browser->post($url,
    [ 'option_id' => '3',
      'action' => 'vote',
      'poll_ident' => '5',
    ]
);

die "Couldn't get $url -- ", $response->status_line
    unless $response->is_success;

print $response->content;

    I think it's working ... from 8.7% to 9.2% in a couple minutes.

    "It's merely symptomatic of our post-modern ennui. ... (Pause) I like pork!" - Brak

    by snappy on Sat Dec 04, 2004 at 12:14:16 PM PDT

    •  You rule! (none / 0)

      Nice work in the last 80 minutes!

      JRE 2008 "We should ask the American people to be patriotic about something other than war." -John Edwards

      by CA JAY on Sat Dec 04, 2004 at 01:29:10 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  You aren't hacking a vote, are you? ;-) (4.00 / 2)

      What an un-American thing to do!  (unless you're a Republican contractor "counting" votes)

      If a thousand men were not to pay their tax bills this year, that would not be a violent and bloody measure, as it would be to pay them, and enable the State...

      by HenryDavid on Sat Dec 04, 2004 at 03:57:07 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  user-agent header (none / 0)

      You should also be forging the User-Agent header:  maybe one for MSIE would be appropriate.  :)

      by worker control on Sat Dec 04, 2004 at 05:08:29 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Or choose randomly from a list each time (none / 0)

        so that it looks genuine--but they've caught on anyway, so it doesn't really matter now.  You are probably getting a lifetime ban from them.  Wear it as a badge of honor.

        by NonemptySubset on Sat Dec 04, 2004 at 05:16:15 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  yes (none / 0)

          You would want to set the example that you want to live by, that is the only way to win elections.

          That being said , that poll construction was weak. Someone was gonna hack it.

          I learned long ago, that cheating affects ones mind. you begin to go down the path of a lessor life then.

          by jd11111 on Sat Dec 04, 2004 at 09:07:22 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Maybe (none / 0)

            It depends on whether you're cheating to win or fixing to vote to show that the people who wrote the script are incompetent.

            Incidentally, I tend to fall into a very mild version the latter category.  I enjoy thinking of ways to work around restrictions, but I don't actually use them.  It's enough for me to know that it could be done.

            by NonemptySubset on Sat Dec 04, 2004 at 09:11:36 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

    •  Question... (3.86 / 15)

      I read and understand your code.  I read your post, but in order to understand it completely, I have to ask, in fact I would be remiss if I did not ask:

      HAVE YOU LOST YOUR MIND???

      We're here talking about how to make sure that every legal vote is counted in the elections that really matter, and you go and disgrace us with this!

      If we are going to have any credibility in looking at elections, we must avoid even the appearance of impropriety.  In one shot you managed to destroy DailyKos' credibility.

      DUMB

      Sorceress Sarah  

      It is no accident that Liberty and Liberal are the same word.

      by Sorceress Sarah on Sat Dec 04, 2004 at 11:12:13 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  I would agree with you if (4.00 / 2)

        this wasn't a wingnut website trying to boost there ego's by wining all the categories.  

        All he did was mess with a poorly designed poll that we never would have won anyway.  He even admitted to doing this on their website.

        McCain housing policy shaped by lobbyist

        by sgilman on Sun Dec 05, 2004 at 12:04:18 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  Disagree (4.00 / 3)

        To me snappy has quickly demonstrated the necessity of having a paper trail for ballots.

        John McCain

        by joejoejoe on Sun Dec 05, 2004 at 12:32:03 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  Actually (4.00 / 4)

        he just showed how DAMNED easy it is to Freep elections over the internet. Besides, nothing we say OR do is going to change what people on LGF think of us. Why not mess with them?

        SUPPORT CrashingtheStates!

        by RNinNC on Sun Dec 05, 2004 at 03:26:03 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  give me a break (4.00 / 6)

        Oh give me a break.  
        • The poll was done by a right wing site and had a "Micheal Moore hates America" ad on the sidebar!
        • Their methodology was horrible!  The rules specifiy that you can vote once a day and they advertised on the right-wing sites.  This was not a legit poll to begin with!
        • I wasn't secretive about messing with their poll, as I took no steps to hide what I was trying to do.
        • I didn't think they were stupid enough to code a web poll where this kind of thing would work.  If they want to make a web poll, it's not hard to prevent this stuff.

        "It's merely symptomatic of our post-modern ennui. ... (Pause) I like pork!" - Brak

        by snappy on Sun Dec 05, 2004 at 08:29:29 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  Gave you a four (none / 1)

      Death to the meaningless online poll!!!  You got a four because that thuglican poll site's pique was precious.  You rock!

      IOKIYAR! They believe markets and competition solve everything AND that the universe is centrally planned.

      by No One No Where on Sun Dec 05, 2004 at 04:50:11 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  If You Stoop to the (none / 1)

      level of your adversary then you have lost already.

      I gave you a two for playing dirty and providing more ammunition to the right-wing assholes to claim that we are just as dirty as they are. It is one thing to play aggressively, it is another to cheat. (Regardless of the poll's owners or intent.)

      The same argument applied to this poll could be applied to the entire 2004 election. I think you have shamed the people on this site.

      by Hrothgar on Sun Dec 05, 2004 at 07:03:56 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  respectfully disagree (4.00 / 4)

        I understand your point about stooping to the level of your adversary, but in this case I disagree with that characterization of snappy.

        If the action undertaken was simply "playing dirty" to win at all costs, then snappy would not have posted the precise means by which it was accomplished.

        I took the points to be much larger ones:

        1. You can't trust most online polls as anything more than exercises in vanity and/or self-fulfilling prophecy by the folks who create them. First of all, who the hell knows what "sample" you're getting? Even a poll in a diary on dkos (which function I use regularly myself and enjoy participating in) is mostly just for fun, really; can we really trust the results of the demographic polls, for example, that we've had recently? Have they been designed to take into account the site traffic at a particular time of day, etc.? We know how many folks who answered the gender poll were identifying as male or female; do we have any idea how accurate a representation they are of the kos community? I'm not sayin' that we can't do such demographic polls; I'm just pointing out that they are inherently a pretty imperfect way to gather data about which to make strong conclusions.
        2. Aside from their entirely un-random sampling, online polls are [clearly] often too easy to crack into and mess with. In the case of the poll mentioned in this diary, the author of the code wanted to make this flaw obvious.
        3. Hopefully, if enough silly online polls are COMPLETELY MESSED with, in a very upfront way as has been done here (hell, the code was even posted at the polling place!), then the makers of such polls will either do a better job of setting them up or, better still, do away with them altogether as people ignore them.

        So FWIW I think snappy did something completely reasonable in response to a less-than-reasonable poll; especially since the code to crack it is posted at the poll's website.

        There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies, and statistics. --Benjamin Disraeli, cited by Mark Twain

        by sheba on Sun Dec 05, 2004 at 07:18:42 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  well done, loser. (2.00 / 2)

      they've taken the dailykos out of the running. in response to your stupid ass.

      why the hell would you cheat when we were winning anyway? it's fucking pathetic. same to everyone who used this.

      and every one of you who said this was okay because the poll was run by republicans and republican sites were winning is just as fucking pathetic and unscrupulous. you people are no less thugs than the right wing freaks at LGF if this is the sort of ethos you follow.

      in short, piss off.

      to dispel any previous confusion arising from the sig before this,
      i'd like to reaffirm that this account is indeed dedicated to justice.

      by Tacoma Narrows on Sun Dec 05, 2004 at 07:34:43 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  We weren't winning (none / 0)

        We were under 10% before he ran this code.  

        This is a wing nut site - just go look at who advertises on the 2003 winner for best liberal log.  

        McCain housing policy shaped by lobbyist

        by sgilman on Sun Dec 05, 2004 at 08:28:20 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  it doesn't matter, genious. (2.50 / 2)

          i don't care if hitler runs the fucking site (and judging by their logo, he just might). the point is that unscrupulous shit like this reflects on this site.

          i mean, granted, kos claims the site as a "partisan blog" as opposed to a "liberal blog," which undermines whatever philosophical or ideological integrity it might have had, but it would be nice if people here could at least say they don't subscribe to the machiavellian brand of activism the hated "freepers" do. unfortunately, all we can say is that only some people here are unscrupulous just as presumably the unscrupulous amongst the freepers are in the minority.

          to dispel any previous confusion arising from the sig before this,
          i'd like to reaffirm that this account is indeed dedicated to justice.

          by Tacoma Narrows on Mon Dec 06, 2004 at 12:53:46 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  I do care (none / 0)

            The 2003 winner for best liberal blog bashes the NY Times for criticizing bush and supports the Iraq war.  I didn't know Islamists were are enemy (Dec 2nd post).  I always thouht it was the Extremists not Islam.  

            He admitted on the site that he did it.  He wasn't trying to win by cheating he was trying to make a point.

            McCain housing policy shaped by lobbyist

            by sgilman on Mon Dec 06, 2004 at 05:20:49 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  how noble of you. (none / 1)

              caring loses its moral weight when it's used to excuse unscrupulousness. by the same token, klansmen cared that the guy on the end of their noose was black. if you don't like the comparison, be more careful with how you throw around loaded language like that in the future.

              it doesn't matter what point he thought he was serving. the point is that he cheated and cheating is bad, okay? it doesn't matter what your rationale is nor does it matter what his excuse is after the fact. he wrote something with which to contaminate a poll on another site, which is effectively vandalism, and encouraged others to use it, which they did. this is not a complex exercise in moral calculus.

              you may have been conditioned to think about right wingers as subhumans without the right to dispose of their time and bandwidth as they see fit, but that doesn't make it so. the sheer fact that you don't see anything wrong with this is unbelievable and speaks to the power reading blogs has on people.

              to dispel any previous confusion arising from the sig before this,
              i'd like to reaffirm that this account is indeed dedicated to justice.

              by Tacoma Narrows on Mon Dec 06, 2004 at 05:36:07 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  Cheating is wrong (none / 0)

                but exposing flaws in a poll that people will take as accurate is not.  I never saw a post encouraging others to cheat.  

                I never reffered to right wingers as subhuman; it's good to know that you are the authority on what someone believes.  I simply stated the obvious -  a poll on a right wing blog is going to be won by a right wing site.  Someone could put up a poll here and, of course, Kos would win.  

                McCain housing policy shaped by lobbyist

                by sgilman on Mon Dec 06, 2004 at 06:00:06 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  social work with a keyboard. (none / 1)

                  look, i'm not your god damned sunday school teacher. if this sort of bullshit sophistry is the stuff of your moral judgements, there's nothing i can do for you.

                  to dispel any previous confusion arising from the sig before this,
                  i'd like to reaffirm that this account is indeed dedicated to justice.

                  by Tacoma Narrows on Mon Dec 06, 2004 at 06:02:31 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  I guess (none / 0)

                    we are just coming at this from dfferent positions.    You beleive any form of cheating is wrong no matter what and I believe if you're cheating to show it can be done and stop it from happening for real, its not.

                    He admitted to doing so on their site before it was caught and the flaw was corrected.  And even though the moderator says they was trying to let people behind firewalls running NAT and Proxy servers the fact is that technology is available to close the loop hole and still let everyone vote - they're just being lazy.

                    For someone that's taking the moral high ground you sure swear at me a lot:)

                    McCain housing policy shaped by lobbyist

                    by sgilman on Mon Dec 06, 2004 at 06:30:00 PM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

    •  Congratulations! (3.40 / 5)

      You, sir, are a moron!

      I have no doubt that this poll is easy to hack, I have no doubt that it ultimately means nothing in the grand scheme of things, I have no doubt that your little 16 year-old "hacker" morality tells you that finding security holes is a good thing.  

      I also have no doubt that posting "HAY D00DZ HERE IS HOW TO HACK THIS POLL HURR HURR HURR!!" in public, on one of the most prominent pro-Democrat sites in the blogosphere, is tantamount to being one of the most stupid and ridiculous things I have seen anyone do in a long, long time.  Put simply, this is now making its way all around the right-wing blogosphere, one more thing for them to beat "the left" with.

      "No wonder Kos is such a sewer of conspiracy theories about vote fraud.  It's just elementary projection; some of those people are just that dishonest, and so of course they assume everyone else is, too."

      "It's done in a spirit of fun, and relies on a modicum of good faith among the participants. But liberals don't seem to be able to do anything honestly, to follow the most minimal standards of sportsmanship, or to do anything in a spirit of good will and good humor. Since Kevin hasn't designed the competition using national security-level safeguards against cheating, the liberals think it's OK to ruin the contest for everyone else by writing code that racks up thousands of fictitious votes for "their" blogs. Not only do they see nothing wrong with this, they brag about it openly."

      So congratulations.  If you wanted to display yourself as a counterproductive, socially illiterate cheat, and in doing so (and this applies to all the commenters with their faux-intellectual justifications for cheating as well) tar "the left" with your actions, you have succeeded.  If, however, you wanted to do anything to improve the standing of this blog site and the left in general, you have failed, dismally and miserably, in every respect.

      Maybe people on the right were doing it too.  Who knows, they didn't fucking post that they were cheating on their fucking blogs, did they?  This isn't crazy hacker land, mate.  Nobody's fucking impressed by what you did.  You're an idiot and you've hurt yourself and others because of single-minded thoughtlessness.

      by McDuff on Sun Dec 05, 2004 at 11:02:17 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  The other side was cheating (none / 0)

        They posted this link before snappy ran this code (look at the posting date).

        McCain housing policy shaped by lobbyist

        by sgilman on Sun Dec 05, 2004 at 08:32:31 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Gee, that's what my three year old says (none / 1)

          when I tell her to stop hitting her brother: "but he started it."

          If that is what we are reduced to, then fuck it all. Truly childish and pathetic.

          by Hrothgar on Mon Dec 06, 2004 at 07:57:24 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Get real (none / 1)

            Did you even read the post I responded to?

            Who knows, they didn't fucking post that they were cheating on their fucking blogs, did they?

            I was just answering the question.

            As for the awards themselves - go look and see who advertises for the 2003 winner of best liberal blog.

            The whole thing is a joke.

            McCain housing policy shaped by lobbyist

            by sgilman on Mon Dec 06, 2004 at 08:55:40 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  Yeah, I read the post (none / 0)

              and the thread/responses and looked at the website (before the "shit" hit the fan).

              It's still a childish response.

              by Hrothgar on Mon Dec 06, 2004 at 09:34:09 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  My post wasn't worded very well (none / 0)

                I was just trying to answer a question, I wasn't saying it gave us a reason for doing so.  As for what happened here - I read the posts that snappy made on their site before they were removed and since he admitted to doing this before it was caught I got the impression he was just showing that it could be done.  In the end, the loop hole was fixed and the valid votes were restored.

                McCain housing policy shaped by lobbyist

                by sgilman on Mon Dec 06, 2004 at 06:56:27 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

        •  Oh go read it again. (none / 0)

          Pay closer attention.  
          Shameless information plug. Nothing more.

          by Bertrum on Mon Dec 06, 2004 at 05:25:11 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  I was reffering to this post (none / 1)

            #38         Mr Pol  12/3/2004 11:23AM PST

            #33 Daybrother

                I'm going to need 20 or 30 provisional ballots...

            Ah, voting the 'liberal' way... Go here. Add the 'zap cookies' bookmarklet to your favorites. Vote. Then run the 'zap cookies' bookmarklet, refresh page, run bookmarklet, refresh page... each refresh will count as a vote.

            It's funny that they claim we are the ones commiting fraud (for real).

            McCain housing policy shaped by lobbyist

            by sgilman on Mon Dec 06, 2004 at 07:06:50 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

    •  How sad. (none / 0)

      How hard would it be to play it straight?
      Dang. This is worse than a jr. high popularity contest.

      by Bertrum on Sun Dec 05, 2004 at 08:52:54 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  I've gotten to the bottom of snappygate. (none / 0)

        Karl Rove is behind all of this!  He's stolen snappy's identity and he posted this script in an attempt to make it look like people here are committing voter fraud.

        Somebody get Olbermann on the phone.

        by Boot2daHead on Sun Dec 05, 2004 at 10:03:51 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  Pyrro suggests super-troll-rating (none / 0)

      this code to show that we don't advocate this sort of behavior.  See his diary.

      I think it is an OK idea: it won't push the genie back in the bottle, and it won't hide the content from trusted users, but it does show some sort of self-policing.

      I would however like to post some counterbalancing mojo on a different posts by snappy.

      --Is RINO a good thing?

      by anonymous coward 8 on Mon Dec 06, 2004 at 11:05:08 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

View Story | 188 comments