Log In

Home
    - Create Journal
    - Update
    - Download

LiveJournal
    - News
    - Paid Accounts
    - Contributors

Customize
    - Customize Journal
    - Create Style
    - Edit Style

Find Users
    - Random!
    - By Region
    - By Interest
    - Search

Edit ...
    - Personal Info &
      Settings
    - Your Friends
    - Old Entries
    - Your Pictures
    - Your Password

Developer Area

Need Help?
    - Lost Password?
    - Freq. Asked
      Questions
    - Support Area



Becca Stareyes ([info]beccastareyes) wrote in [info]otf_wank,
@ 2010-01-23 13:02:00


Previous Entry  Add to memories!  Tell a Friend!  Next Entry
Voter Fraud and Internet Popularity in 140 Characters or Less
The Shorty Awards is a contest to select the best of Twitter in certain topics... by encouraging folks to tweet (or post their votes via Twitter) their votes, where the top five will go on to judging. Yeah, you can tell this will end well. One of the awards is for Health (or #health -- the hashtags on Twitter let you search for certain topics).

Anyway, this seems to be shaping up into a wankstorm. Not really because of the health issues themselves, though that plays a part, but mostly the standard of 'cheating, vote solicitation, and conspiracies'. The nominal issue is whether the Science-Based Medicine (SBM) or the Alternative Medicine (alt-med) should take the Shorty, but... well, it stops being about the medicine and more about which side wins.

The Cast
Science-Based Medicine/Skeptic Movement
Dr. Rachael Dunlop/@DrRachie -- Skeptical podcaster and heart-disease researcher on Twitter.
Orac -- Cancer surgeon, vaccination advocate, and medical blogger.
PZ Myers -- Skeptic, atheist and biologist, known for 'pharyngulizing' internet polls, which basically means posting links to informal internet polls on religion, science and so on, with the intent that his readers will push them in unexpected directions.
Tim Farley -- Vaccine advocate and blog commenter.

Alternative Medicine
Joseph Mercola/@mercola -- Osteopath and webmaster of a natural health site.
Mike Adams/@HealthRanger -- Webmaster of NaturalNews.com, an alt-med news site with a bit of a reputation for conspiracy-mongering.

Going to apologize - I follow Orac's blog, so most of my commentary is from there.


Anyway, so the Shorty Awards are humming along, with HealthRanger/Adams in first place, DrRachie in second, and Mercola in third. The skeptical/SBM blogosphere gets a hold of things, and advocates voting for DrRachie, since she seems to be the best candidate to overtake Adams. Especially since Adams is rather disliked in the skeptical blogosphere, as this quote from Orac shows:

At the time of my writing this, it's that über-quack of quacks, that despicable ghoul for whom there is no such thing as sinking too low in the service of promoting quackery, Mike Adams of NaturalNews.com.


Anyway, so the word spreads out to vote for DrRachie, and to give silly informal nominations to people you don't like. Adams and Mercola continue to advocate for voting for themselves -- pretty much business as usual for these things.

Then folks start noticing some foul play. Commenter #17 on Orac's blog post, Tim Farley, notices something fishy. Since linking to comment threads on scienceblogs is a pain in the ass, I reproduce it here.

All of the voting in this contest is on Twitter and therefore public, of course, so some of us have been digging into the votes that Mike Adams has been getting. We've found a large number of accounts like this:

[list of six twitter accounts]

...where clearly the ONLY purpose for that Twitter account is to vote for Mike Adams. I estimate that 10% to 20% of his vote total consists of accounts like this.

Fortunately there are (quite reasonably) rules against this. I encourage people to write to info@shortyawards.com and point out that they should remove these votes from the total before the nominations are over.

The good news is the votes aren't the only thing that determines the winner. There's a panel of judges too. But if he doesn't win, I predict Mike Adams will accuse the awards committee of collusion with Big Pharma to suppress his votes.


The awards insist that all votes be from active accounts created before the date of votes started, so using votes like this doesn't count. On the other hand, it will mean some poor smuck at the Shorty Awards has to go through and screen out these things.

Anyway, the Shorty Awards judges investigate, and Adams/HealthRanger is disqualified. And, well, it's apparently all a conspiracy by the vaccine and pharmaceutical industry, and that he and his readers are totally innocent.

It wasn't really surprising to see the vaccine quacks engaging in their false accusations, of course: Lying and cheating is par for the course for the vaccine and pharmaceutical industries. Their supporters apparently reflect that same lack of ethical behavior. They will apparently do anything to win, even if it means engaging in widespread false accusations and trying to get natural health people removed from the contest altogether.


And, also the Shorty Awards are also at fault:

In investigating this issue, I also learned that the Shorty Awards actually encourages defamatory attacks, slanderous accusations and profanity as part of their voting process. They do this by ignoring their responsibility to police and remove such unprofessional behavior on the part of candidates and voters. The vaccine-pushing candidate now "winning" the Shorty Awards in the health category has text on her website that says, "If water has memory, then homeopathy is full of shit."


But, really, See How Loudly I Don't Care?

In the end, I suppose winning a Shorty Award wasn't really such a big deal. We don't need recognition from some tiny website to legitimize our existence on the 'net. But seeing how the Shorty Awards engages in outright vote fraud while rigging the awards just goes to prove, once again, how supporters of pharmaceutical medicine lie and cheat their way into getting what they want -- ethics be damned!


Of course, that doesn't stop him from telling his readers to vote for Mercola. Or his readers from giving DrRachie nominations like:

"I nominate DrRachie for a Shorty Award in #health because... She;s part of a scam"
"...because she represents Big Phrama and shows how corrupt it is"
"..because she is the puppet who you want to win instead of Mike Adams."

Which she was kind enough to include in the comments of Orac's second post, gloating about this and mocking Adams.

I swear, this is sometimes why I read Orac's blog -- some of the people who are opposed to him are just over the top wanky. (Sometime I'll dig up the story of a Age of Autism blogger photoshoping Paul Offit eating a baby for Thanksgiving.)


(Post a new comment)


[info]galateus
2010-01-24 02:08 am UTC (link)
Wait, so is HealthRanger disqualified because people who like him cheated, or because he cheated?

(Reply to this)(Thread)


[info]beccastareyes
2010-01-24 02:20 am UTC (link)
I don't know. I'd assume that the awards folks ruled that he was behind the cheating attempts, but whether he actually did it or it was just his followers, I can't say.

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

(no subject) - [info]galateus, 2010-01-24 07:38 am UTC

[info]dragonfangirl
2010-01-24 04:01 am UTC (link)
Skeptic, atheist and biologist, known for 'pharyngulizing' internet polls, which basically means posting links to informal internet polls on religion, science and so on, with the intent that his readers will push them in unexpected directions.

I learn new vocabulary every day here. Is 'trolling' too unscientific a word for him?

(Reply to this)(Thread)


[info]keri
2010-01-24 04:46 am UTC (link)
I think originally, he just said he was "crashing the poll", but there are a lot of readers of Pharyngula, and the results always tend to be a bit like when fark or whatsit do this kind of thing. So people started calling what was going on "Pharyngulating", I guess as a pun on "calibrating" or something?

Also, I've never seen PZ, when explaining why he posts links to polls, not point out that online polls are easily hijacked and also kind of stupid in that the people running them often point to the results as being conclusive evidence for whatever. There's a very recent post on his blog concerning the matter, actually. Not to say it isn't trolling, though. It is.

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

(no subject) - [info]feenix, 2010-01-26 12:46 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]keri, 2010-01-26 01:03 am UTC

[info]jupiterpluvius
2010-01-24 10:55 pm UTC (link)
It's often called "freeping" because one of the first websites to be known for doing the "GO HERE AND RIG THE POLL" thing was FreeRepublic.com, a US right-wing political chat forum.

I think the "Pharyngulating" is a response to that.

I wouldn't call that "trolling"--"vote-fixing" or "poll-rigging" maybe.

(Reply to this)(Parent)


[info]seiberwing
2010-01-27 08:28 pm UTC (link)
As I understand it, he wants them crashed/altered/atheistrushed because he really doesn't like the concept of online polls in general as something of consequence. He's not trying to actually push any agenda besides 'online polls are stupid'.

(Reply to this)(Parent)


[info]argylespy
2010-01-24 04:29 am UTC (link)
As awesomely wtf-ish this is I'm mostly here to squee over your adorable Fury icon.

(Reply to this)(Thread)


[info]beccastareyes
2010-01-24 05:24 am UTC (link)
[Unknown LJ tag] made it, this one, and one other for me. Thank you.

(Reply to this)(Parent)


[info]beccastareyes
2010-01-24 05:25 am UTC (link)
Er... Zanne Chaos/[info]zannechaos. But here -- see the third one.

(Reply to this)(Parent)


[info]kookaburra
2010-01-24 05:05 am UTC (link)
Arrrrrgh my blood pressure goes up every time I hear the name "Mercola". My mom keeps giving me printouts of his newsletter with little sticky notes on them and gets all tearful when I thrown them out with the rest of the trash. And he convinced her to start taking hydrogen peroxide to "oxygenate the tissues".

WHAT IS 98% SPO2 NOT GOOD ENOUGH FOR YOU?!

(Reply to this)(Thread)


[info]nekoneko
2010-01-24 05:40 am UTC (link)
Taking as in... drinking?

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

(no subject) - [info]kookaburra, 2010-01-24 05:43 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]moonjaguar, 2010-01-24 07:12 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]adevyish, 2010-01-24 11:17 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]kookaburra, 2010-01-24 02:48 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]feenix, 2010-01-24 09:57 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]keri, 2010-01-25 01:18 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]keleri, 2010-01-25 02:01 am UTC
(no subject) - tetradecimal, 2010-01-25 12:19 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]cmdr_zoom, 2010-01-27 06:53 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]kookaburra, 2010-01-27 08:01 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]rosehiptea, 2010-01-24 05:44 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]kitt_in_socks, 2010-01-24 10:47 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]khym_chanur, 2010-01-24 04:51 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]miraba, 2010-01-25 12:31 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]khym_chanur, 2010-01-25 02:33 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]miraba, 2010-01-25 04:02 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]chibikaijuu, 2010-01-28 03:39 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]takhys, 2010-01-24 04:56 pm UTC

[info]tintin
2010-01-24 06:16 am UTC (link)
My boyfriend said he used to do that and it made him feel like he was high.

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

(no subject) - [info]the__ivorytower, 2010-01-24 06:50 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]moonjaguar, 2010-01-24 07:14 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]seiberwing, 2010-01-27 08:30 pm UTC

[info]khym_chanur
2010-01-24 04:49 pm UTC (link)
B-b-but, that's what breathing does! And if you're not getting enough oxygen, you can hyperventilate for free.

(Reply to this)(Parent)


[info]deliciouschaos
2010-01-24 09:37 pm UTC (link)
Countdown to silver nanoparticles being used as a magical cure-all starts now.

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

(no subject) - [info]khym_chanur, 2010-01-25 02:22 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]deliciouschaos, 2010-01-25 05:57 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]tofuknight, 2010-01-27 09:44 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]cmdr_zoom, 2010-01-27 06:55 pm UTC

[info]amadi
2010-01-24 05:36 am UTC (link)
I am convinced that the Shorty Awards may be the second step (after the stupid new auto-retweet thing) to ruining Twitter.

(Reply to this)(Thread)


[info]caffeine_fairy
2010-01-24 11:42 pm UTC (link)
Philosophically speaking, can you ruin Twitter?

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

(no subject) - [info]amadi, 2010-01-25 01:43 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]keri, 2010-01-25 02:12 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]msmanna, 2010-01-26 04:01 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]amadi, 2010-01-26 04:03 am UTC

[info]tarash
2010-01-24 08:57 pm UTC (link)
I am surprised Ben Goldacre wasn't nominated on the Science-based Medicine side.

(Reply to this)(Thread)


[info]jupiterpluvius
2010-01-24 10:57 pm UTC (link)
His tweets aren't as good as his columns or blog--he basically just tweets whatever comes into his head (right now he's banging on about some photograph of Winston Churchill).

(Reply to this)(Parent)


[info]miss_padfoot
2010-01-24 10:13 pm UTC (link)
You could also link to PZ's post about the whole thing. He quotes all the stuff that Adams said skeptics supposedly believe (including "we have no immune system without vaccines" and "water is inert").

Thank you so much for posting this, by the way. I love PZ and Orac. I mostly just lurk, but I see you in the comments there from time to time :)

(Reply to this)(Thread)


[info]beccastareyes
2010-01-24 10:23 pm UTC (link)
That came out after I wrote it, sadly. I also forgot Adam's twitter comment about suing... someone. (Possibly everyone.)

(Reply to this)(Parent)


[info]keri
2010-01-25 04:44 am UTC (link)
Oh man, I keep going back to check the comments on that post, and recently (uhm, in the last couple hours), someone posted more of Adams's rant about sceptics. It's so amazingly out of left field and paints "sceptics" as pretty much the opposite of what they are. It's amazingly blind. link to specific comment with copy of rant (the second that continues Adams's post, which you have to register for if you want to read the whole thing)

My favorite parts:

  1. [Sceptics] are the easiest people to fool. They're the easiest to hypnotize, too, because they lack independent thinking skills.

  2. These are the people who line up to be injected with useless H1N1 vaccines. (The joke is on them, of course. Those vaccines were a complete fraud...)

  3. [Sceptics] are so incredibly isolated from reality that they don't even believe in their body's own ability to heal itself.

  4. No wonder they seek to destroy themselves with chemicals -- they don't even think they're alive to begin with! Skeptics are bent on self destruction.

  5. Soulless, mindless, lacking consciousness and free will, having no awareness of the value of life... these are the skeptics arguing for vaccines, mammograms and chemotherapy today.


but the very very best part is
If you believe what the skeptics want you to believe (because they are always right, of course), then you must accept the fact that THEY have no consciousness. They are not really "alive." They are just robotic biological machines. They are drones, in other words. And drones are not equal to a being of energy with a consciousness and a soul, inhabiting a human body with purpose and awareness.



I mean wow.

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

(no subject) - [info]miss_padfoot, 2010-01-25 05:24 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]dragonfangirl, 2010-01-25 07:54 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]cmdr_zoom, 2010-01-26 10:14 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]darksumomo, 2010-01-25 09:27 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]beccastareyes, 2010-01-25 02:08 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]sarracenia, 2010-01-25 04:27 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]beccastareyes, 2010-01-25 04:52 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]khym_chanur, 2010-01-25 05:02 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]keri, 2010-01-25 09:36 pm UTC
Thoughts on yao-err, chicken pox. - [info]feenix, 2010-01-26 12:40 am UTC
Re: Thoughts on yao-err, chicken pox. - [info]keri, 2010-01-26 01:02 am UTC
Re: Thoughts on yao-err, chicken pox. - [info]feenix, 2010-01-26 06:07 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]v_digitalwytch, 2010-01-26 09:59 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]caffeine_fairy, 2010-01-26 02:12 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]cmdr_zoom, 2010-01-26 10:18 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]ekaterinv, 2010-01-27 10:53 am UTC

[info]ellensmithee
2010-01-25 07:45 am UTC (link)
This is my favorite line in PZ's post: Of course, he is a homeopath. Maybe to him, a twitter award is like an infinitely diluted Nobel Prize, and is especially potent.

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

(no subject) - [info]miss_padfoot, 2010-01-25 07:47 am UTC

[info]paranoidandroid
2010-01-25 01:54 pm UTC (link)
Another takedown of Adams at Respectful Insolence:
A pyromaniac in a field of straw man or a black hole of burning stupid incinerating every straw man in the universe?

I'd like to tell Mr. Adams that my most important "sceptic" action was to do my own research on the underlying issues of my back problems, leading to the conclusion that LESS doctor visits and medication and MORE time at the gym would be more productive in the long run. But that would probably break his brain, if there is anything left to break now.

(Reply to this)


[info]jupiterpluvius
2010-01-25 09:33 pm UTC (link)
Mercola's brilliant comeback today was to call Dr. Rachie "an overweight non-physician".

Because, you know, those PH. D. MEDICAL RESEARCHERS don't know jack.

As for "overweight" I don't even. I mean, just no.

(Reply to this)(Thread)


[info]feenix
2010-01-26 12:44 am UTC (link)
Well, fat people are fat because God doesn't love them they have an addiction to Twinkies they sit at their computers flaming truthers and sabotaging Twitter awards all day they poison themselves with toxins from Big Pharma, don't you know.

If Dr. Rachie would just get on the homeopathic, holistic bandwagon, she'd look like a supermodel in no time flat!

Or something. I don't know.

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

(no subject) - [info]soupspooks, 2010-01-28 01:12 am UTC

 
   
Privacy Policy - COPPA
Legal Disclaimer - Site Map