Again that is extremely offensive... Read tomcort's post....

/offtopic

Dualshocked you seriously need to do something about your sig, its waaaaaaaay to big...

/ontopic

To be honest, I didn't know you could do that....

I may have got the wrong end of the stick here but it was worded pretty vaguely, I don't think he was trying to be offensive here.

Definitely, takes up a whole 1900x1080 page, please remove some elements of your signature >.<

/ontopic

So, are we saying that you can only click the buttons that take you to the sites and you get the credits? I don't even see any reason not to fill out the captchas, it's hardly a massive effort. The laziness of some people to compliment their own selfishness is unbelievable..

This is offtopic, but I enabled the signature size limiter.

Perhaps I should stop doing that then <object class="emojione" data="https://resources.enjin.com/1489581540/themes/core/images/emojione/svg/1f642.svg?0" type="image/svg+xml" standby=":)">:)</object>

If this is a huge problem it's actually relatively easy to code around and at least determine who is voting erroneously. Assuming the form requires a live session (logged in) then it's a matter of logging session id to the accounts voted. If someone reports fraudulent votes on their behalf then actions can be taken against that logged account/ip address.

Relatively easy depending on the skillset of the site maintainers. I've implemented tons of backend code with html/ajax interfaces and even early on the process was not overly complex.

Of course, this becomes moot if a system is put in place that will prevent fraudulent activity completely. At that point even if votes are consumed then at least they were completed with a return value to the site and account.

We figured out how we would do it, but it is a lot more complex than what you briefly explained. The majority of sites don't offer us an easy alternative to validate votes and we have to make our own work around.

... if it would be so easy, all other servers would do it.

Edit: btw, none of the voting sites requires a "live session". (or actually one out of 20 does...)

At least a few of the sites seem to have implemented a "Votifier" that requires entering your MC username. Hopefully that will help cut down the wiggity wackness. a bit or at least give some ability to verify at least some of the votes are being posted fully. It could go to say that those that are failing to do this step on these couple sites are prob not going to go through with the captchas on the other sites either..

I am not a coding person.. but I remember back in the earlier days of the internet some of he old social sites (yahoo, AOL) had the ability to log into a "shared" internet session, where you and a buddy could see each other's browser and take a tour together through the world wide web.. could there be a website page plugin that you log into and it will make a history of your "shared session" with minetown then somehow it keeps a log. It would prob be too much work to code it into instant checking, but it could provide a means to investigate if one has a suspicion of abuse, for example you fill out a captcha and get a vote confirmation page. the Minetown shared session logs this confirmation page into a data file. . . for example "Diskenetic clicked vote, vote page loaded, captcha script ran, vote confirmed page loaded." or something like that... need someone smarter than me but It sounds kinda possible... ???