161 TOP 1000 voters have ranked Gravity so far, 37 have ranked it 1/10. Collusion? Or vote manipulation by segments of the film industry?

  • 2
  • Problem
  • Updated 6 years ago
  • Solved
Archived and Closed

This conversation is no longer open for comments or replies and is no longer visible to community members. The community moderator provided the following reason for archiving: Old thread

As of 6:00 p.m. Eastern Time, 10/15/2013, 161 TOP 1000 voters have ranked the movie Gravity and 37 of the 161 votes are 1/10. Given the current popular ranking for Gravity of 8.7, the current distribution of votes by TOP 1000 Voters on Gravity indicates that there is collusion among TOP 1000 voters to undermine the integrity of the IMDB voting process. What other explanation is possible? And will IMDB allow this external manipulation of their votes to occur?

I offer one theory as to what may be occurring. It may be that movie studios feel that IMDB voter rankings affect the financial prospects of their films directly - and indirectly, by affecting the eventual liklihood of their films winning awards. The IMDB popular vote for a film is based on tens to hundreds of thousands of votes, and thus beyond their ability to influence, but it is conceivable that they would be tempted to alter the average voting results that are reported by IMDB for their TOP 1000 voters. They could do this by paying a number of people to vote on a large number of films (thus acquiring TOP 1000 VOTER status) and then having them vote 1/10 on competitor films and 10/10 on films produced by the movie studio. I have no proof of this, but the current distribution of votes on the film Gravity by TOP 1000 Voters speaks for itself. Something is crooked about the TOP 1000 Voter voting system.

Frankly, my confidence in the results reported by IMDB has been shaken by this discovery. Please advise me and others as to your views on this.
Photo of Gordon Michaels

Gordon Michaels

  • 17 Posts
  • 3 Reply Likes
  • sad

Posted 6 years ago

  • 2
Photo of Emperor

Emperor, Champion

  • 6418 Posts
  • 3004 Reply Likes
It is score bombing - it seems to happen on every film, but disproportionately affects smaller films.

It has nothing to do with any conspiracy - it is foolish types wasting their time hammering in 1 star votes on either every film to get the top voter weighting or they are self-appointed protectors of IMDB voting down every film that seems to have signs of vote-stuffing or they are trolls. Motivation will vary but I suspect in any reasonably large group of 1 voters, you'll find a mix.

IMDB has moved to stop this having an impact on films with less than 100 votes but it is still a problem.

You can get some of the background via this suggestion for a fix (or part of the fix - I also support scrubbing votes for people with suspicious voting patterns):

https://getsatisfaction.com/imdb/topi...
Photo of Gordon Michaels

Gordon Michaels

  • 17 Posts
  • 3 Reply Likes
Notice that the link that you posted ends in an email from me (the original poster, above) concluding that this is a big problem and stating the reasons why. See also my response below - Gordon Michaels
Photo of sienel

sienel, Champion

  • 161 Posts
  • 224 Reply Likes
Hmmm - I'm a Top 1000 voter. I wonder how I can get in on this pay-for-votes action?
Photo of Emperor

Emperor, Champion

  • 6418 Posts
  • 3004 Reply Likes
Move to somewhere like Bangladesh ;)
Photo of sienel

sienel, Champion

  • 161 Posts
  • 224 Reply Likes
That doesn't sound that appealing.

But if any studios want to get around the unseemliness of directly buying my votes and instead just pay for me to go to various film festivals I'll happily take their money! I spent far too much on my trip to the Toronto Film Festival this year.
Photo of Emperor

Emperor, Champion

  • 6418 Posts
  • 3004 Reply Likes
You can buy 30 votes for $5:

http://fiverr.com/linkworkers/provide...

So I doubt you are going to get many takers. If you do, let me know - I haven't been to Frightfest yet...

That doesn't sound that appealing.


I'm sure there are vote farms in most SE Asian countries, so... Thailand? Vietnam? Burma?
Photo of Emperor

Emperor, Champion

  • 6418 Posts
  • 3004 Reply Likes
There are indeed pay-for-votes schemes - I found a number when I was looking into the question of the selling of credits on IMDB:

https://getsatisfaction.com/imdb/topi...

And while discussing fake reviews:

https://getsatisfaction.com/imdb/topi...

However, most people paying for votes would be buying votes on their own titles. It would indeed be in the interest of those selling the votes to have the top voter weighting, so there is an incentive for them to spam 1 votes on all titles to get up there and stay there. This is another reason the system is broken and needs fixing.
Photo of Gordon Michaels

Gordon Michaels

  • 17 Posts
  • 3 Reply Likes
Look, if 37 of the TOP 1000 voters were each trying to stuff the ballot box in order to remain a Top 1000 Voters, then why are all 37 giving every movie the exact same ranking - a 1/10? One would expect that some voters would give every movie a 5, or a 6 or a 7. That would be far less conspicuous. But every single voter is voting a 1/10.

This is automated robotic software in action - and each of the 37+ accounts that are using automated voting are using the same software to post votes - there is no other reason why they are all voting Gravity and other films a 1/10. The similarity of the voting makes it highly likely that the voting on these accounts is coordinated. This is not 37 idiots acting independently - this is 37 accounts using the same voting software or voting instructions.

As I have said elsewhere, if IMDB realizes that their TOP 1000 Voter votes are being corrupted by malware - by automated voting software - then they have two choices. (1) Either analyze, detect and block the use of malware and/or not factor the votes from suspect accounts into the posted vote totals, or, (2) Stop reporting the information about votes in the TOP 1000 Voter category. If these TOp 1000 Voter totals are so unimportant that they are not worth safeguarding, then they are not worth reporting to the public in the first place.

No company -including IMDB - can maintain the trust of their User community if they fail to safeguard the integrity of the information that is being posted.
Photo of Emperor

Emperor, Champion

  • 6418 Posts
  • 3004 Reply Likes
I watched a documentary on social media "like" and "friend" farms - they don't need bots, they just have tightly packed rooms with people logging in and out of accounts all day. It must be cheaper to get some poor soul to do it than get bots to do it.

And again, the reasons for the 1 votes are in my post - trolling and correcting for vote-stuffing.
Photo of Gordon Michaels

Gordon Michaels

  • 17 Posts
  • 3 Reply Likes
Emperor, whether this is automated voting software or "tightly packed rooms with people logging in and out of accounts all day" is actually immaterial. This is an attack (literally a cyberattack) on the IMDB website that is injuring many fim-makers. It could be temporarily neutralized by IMDB by disqualifying all of the scores as voted by the several dozen TOP 1000 voter accounts that are being used to score bomb. That would provide time to develop a corrective action.

Emperor, why do you claim to know that the reason for this score bombing is trolling and vote stuffing? How could you possibly know that? What information is the basis for your statements? How do you know that this is not an attack originating in China or for some other purpose? I admit I don't know why the score-bombing is occurring, but it is having serious consequences and I see no reason to defend the people who are doing it.

This conversation is no longer open for comments or replies.