Re: [openstack-dev] [all][stackalytics] Gaming the Stackalytics stats

On 11/04/2016 5:10 AM, Thierry Carrez wrote: > gordon chung wrote: >> On 08/04/2016 1:26 PM, Davanum Srinivas wrote: >>> Steve pointed out to a problem in Stackalytics: >>> https://twitter.com/stevebot/status/718185667709267969 >>> >>> It's pretty clear what's happening if you look here: >>>

Re: [openstack-dev] [all][stackalytics] Gaming the Stackalytics stats

On Mon, Apr 11, 2016 at 6:48 AM, Ihar Hrachyshka wrote: > Clint Byrum wrote: > > Excerpts from Morgan Fainberg's message of 2016-04-10 16:47:28 -0700: >> >>> On Sun, Apr 10, 2016 at 4:37 PM, Clint Byrum wrote: >>> >>> Excerpts from Matt

Re: [openstack-dev] [all][stackalytics] Gaming the Stackalytics stats

...@linux.vnet.ibm.com] Sent: Saturday, April 09, 2016 9:43 AM To: openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [all][stackalytics] Gaming the Stackalytics stats On 4/8/2016 5:54 PM, Jay Faulkner wrote: > I know a lot of folks explicitly avoid a +0 vote with a comment > becau

Re: [openstack-dev] [all][stackalytics] Gaming the Stackalytics stats

gordon chung wrote: On 08/04/2016 1:26 PM, Davanum Srinivas wrote: Steve pointed out to a problem in Stackalytics: https://twitter.com/stevebot/status/718185667709267969 It's pretty clear what's happening if you look here:

Re: [openstack-dev] [all][stackalytics] Gaming the Stackalytics stats

2016-04-11 10:31 GMT+09:00 Sheel Rana Insaan : >> So should we add what we don't want > to see people -1 for? > >>[1] http://docs.openstack.org/infra/manual/developers.html#peer-review > > This seems right way.. but concern is do everyone follow all docs? Nice point.

Re: [openstack-dev] [all][stackalytics] Gaming the Stackalytics stats

> So should we add what we don't want to see people -1 for? >[1] http://docs.openstack.org/infra/manual/developers.html#peer-review This seems right way.. but concern is do everyone follow all docs? But atleast we should document it somewhere. Regards, Sheel Rana On Apr 11, 2016 6:52 AM,

Re: [openstack-dev] [all][stackalytics] Gaming the Stackalytics stats

2016-04-11 9:46 GMT+09:00 Matt Riedemann : > > > On 4/10/2016 6:37 PM, Clint Byrum wrote: >> >> Excerpts from Matt Riedemann's message of 2016-04-09 06:42:54 -0700: >>> >>> There is also disincentive in +1ing a change that you don't understand >>> and is wrong and then

Re: [openstack-dev] [all][stackalytics] Gaming the Stackalytics stats

On 4/10/2016 6:37 PM, Clint Byrum wrote: Excerpts from Matt Riedemann's message of 2016-04-09 06:42:54 -0700: There is also disincentive in +1ing a change that you don't understand and is wrong and then a core comes along and -1s it (you get dinged for the disagreement). And there is

Re: [openstack-dev] [all][stackalytics] Gaming the Stackalytics stats

Excerpts from Morgan Fainberg's message of 2016-04-10 16:47:28 -0700: > On Sun, Apr 10, 2016 at 4:37 PM, Clint Byrum wrote: > > > Excerpts from Matt Riedemann's message of 2016-04-09 06:42:54 -0700: > > > There is also disincentive in +1ing a change that you don't understand >

Re: [openstack-dev] [all][stackalytics] Gaming the Stackalytics stats

On Sun, Apr 10, 2016 at 4:37 PM, Clint Byrum wrote: > Excerpts from Matt Riedemann's message of 2016-04-09 06:42:54 -0700: > > There is also disincentive in +1ing a change that you don't understand > > and is wrong and then a core comes along and -1s it (you get dinged for > >

Re: [openstack-dev] [all][stackalytics] Gaming the Stackalytics stats

Excerpts from Matt Riedemann's message of 2016-04-09 06:42:54 -0700: > There is also disincentive in +1ing a change that you don't understand > and is wrong and then a core comes along and -1s it (you get dinged for > the disagreement). And there is disincentive in -1ing a change for the >

Re: [openstack-dev] [all][stackalytics] Gaming the Stackalytics stats

nks, > > > > -amrith > > > > [1] http://openstack.markmail.org/thread/nj4onttaibjmfxew > > [2] https://code.google.com/p/gerrit/issues/detail?id=4050 > > > >> -Original Message- > >> From: Matt Riedemann [mailto:mrie...@linux.vnet.ibm.com] &

Re: [openstack-dev] [all][stackalytics] Gaming the Stackalytics stats

[1] http://openstack.markmail.org/thread/nj4onttaibjmfxew >>> [2] https://code.google.com/p/gerrit/issues/detail?id=4050 >>> >>> -Original Message- >>>> From: Matt Riedemann [mailto:mrie...@linux.vnet.ibm.com] >>>> Sent: Saturday, April 09, 2016 9:43 A

Re: [openstack-dev] [all][stackalytics] Gaming the Stackalytics stats

[mailto:mrie...@linux.vnet.ibm.com] Sent: Saturday, April 09, 2016 9:43 AM To: openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [all][stackalytics] Gaming the Stackalytics stats On 4/8/2016 5:54 PM, Jay Faulkner wrote: I know a lot of folks explicitly avoid a +0 vote with a comment because

Re: [openstack-dev] [all][stackalytics] Gaming the Stackalytics stats

mfxew > [2] https://code.google.com/p/gerrit/issues/detail?id=4050 > >> -Original Message- >> From: Matt Riedemann [mailto:mrie...@linux.vnet.ibm.com] >> Sent: Saturday, April 09, 2016 9:43 AM >> To: openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org >> Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [a

Re: [openstack-dev] [all][stackalytics] Gaming the Stackalytics stats

o: openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org > Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [all][stackalytics] Gaming the Stackalytics > stats > > > > On 4/8/2016 5:54 PM, Jay Faulkner wrote: > > I know a lot of folks explicitly avoid a +0 vote with a comment > > because you don't

Re: [openstack-dev] [all][stackalytics] Gaming the Stackalytics stats

I have a quick question: How is anyone hurt out harmed by the practice? I agree it isn't helpful. But it isn't harming either. It could be gaming and it could be ignorance - mistakes by not knowing. I'm asking because I see the same predictable personalities making passive aggressive accusations

Re: [openstack-dev] [all][stackalytics] Gaming the Stackalytics stats

On Apr 9, 2016 12:05, "Ken'ichi Ohmichi" wrote: > > > 2016/04/08 10:55、Anita Kuno : > > >> On 04/08/2016 01:42 PM, Dmitry Tantsur wrote: > >> 2016-04-08 19:26 GMT+02:00 Davanum Srinivas : > >> > >>> Team, > >>> > >>> Steve pointed

Re: [openstack-dev] [all][stackalytics] Gaming the Stackalytics stats

2016/04/08 10:55、Anita Kuno : >> On 04/08/2016 01:42 PM, Dmitry Tantsur wrote: >> 2016-04-08 19:26 GMT+02:00 Davanum Srinivas : >> >>> Team, >>> >>> Steve pointed out to a problem in Stackalytics: >>>

Re: [openstack-dev] [all][stackalytics] Gaming the Stackalytics stats

. - Jay Faulkner *From:* Dolph Mathews <dolph.math...@gmail.com> *Sent:* Friday, April 8, 2016 1:54 PM *To:* OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) *Subject:* Re: [openstack-dev] [all][stac

Re: [openstack-dev] [all][stackalytics] Gaming the Stackalytics stats

On Fri, Apr 8, 2016 at 11:39 PM, Diana Clarke wrote: > On Fri, Apr 8, 2016 at 5:23 PM, Davanum Srinivas wrote: >> To that effect, i am capturing stuff here: >> https://davanum.wordpress.com/2016/04/08/new-to-openstack-reviews-start-here/ > > Here

Re: [openstack-dev] [all][stackalytics] Gaming the Stackalytics stats

On Fri, Apr 8, 2016 at 5:23 PM, Davanum Srinivas wrote: > To that effect, i am capturing stuff here: > https://davanum.wordpress.com/2016/04/08/new-to-openstack-reviews-start-here/ Here are a few more links for your list, Dims. I remember especially liking Sean's blog post,

Re: [openstack-dev] [all][stackalytics] Gaming the Stackalytics stats

On 04/08/2016 05:16 PM, Anita Kuno wrote: > On 04/08/2016 05:10 PM, gordon chung wrote: >> >> >> On 08/04/2016 1:26 PM, Davanum Srinivas wrote: >>> Team, >>> >>> Steve pointed out to a problem in Stackalytics: >>> https://twitter.com/stevebot/status/718185667709267969 >>> >>> It's pretty clear

Re: [openstack-dev] [all][stackalytics] Gaming the Stackalytics stats

_ From: Dolph Mathews <dolph.math...@gmail.com> Sent: Friday, April 8, 2016 1:54 PM To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [all][stackalytics] Gaming the Stackalytics stats On Friday, April 8, 2016, John Dickinson <m...@not.mn

Re: [openstack-dev] [all][stackalytics] Gaming the Stackalytics stats

Hi, Steve, thanks for pointing that out and Dims, thanks for starting the discussion. I guess I feel that the drastic step is/may not be necessary. Here's the reason why: we're trying to solve a subjective problem with a objective solution. All systems have loopholes and there will be people who

Re: [openstack-dev] [all][stackalytics] Gaming the Stackalytics stats

On Apr 8, 2016, at 1:57 PM, Major Hayden wrote: > > On 04/08/2016 03:31 PM, Jeremy Stanley wrote: >> Thanks for taking this up--some people just need >> encouragement/suggestions for better ways to make an impact. On the >> other hand, if you find that many of them have addresses

Re: [openstack-dev] [all][stackalytics] Gaming the Stackalytics stats

On 04/08/2016 05:53 PM, gordon chung wrote: > > > On 08/04/2016 5:23 PM, Davanum Srinivas wrote: >> On Fri, Apr 8, 2016 at 5:10 PM, gordon chung wrote: >>> >>> >>> is it actually affecting anything in the community aside from the >>> reviews being useless. aside from the

Re: [openstack-dev] [all][stackalytics] Gaming the Stackalytics stats

On 08/04/2016 5:23 PM, Davanum Srinivas wrote: > On Fri, Apr 8, 2016 at 5:10 PM, gordon chung wrote: >> >> >> is it actually affecting anything in the community aside from the >> reviews being useless. aside from the 'diversity' tags in governance, >> does anything else use

Re: [openstack-dev] [all][stackalytics] Gaming the Stackalytics stats

On Fri, Apr 8, 2016 at 5:10 PM, gordon chung wrote: > > > On 08/04/2016 1:26 PM, Davanum Srinivas wrote: >> Team, >> >> Steve pointed out to a problem in Stackalytics: >> https://twitter.com/stevebot/status/718185667709267969 >> >> It's pretty clear what's happening if you look

Re: [openstack-dev] [all][stackalytics] Gaming the Stackalytics stats

On 04/08/2016 05:10 PM, gordon chung wrote: > > > On 08/04/2016 1:26 PM, Davanum Srinivas wrote: >> Team, >> >> Steve pointed out to a problem in Stackalytics: >> https://twitter.com/stevebot/status/718185667709267969 >> >> It's pretty clear what's happening if you look here: >>

Re: [openstack-dev] [all][stackalytics] Gaming the Stackalytics stats

On 08/04/2016 1:26 PM, Davanum Srinivas wrote: > Team, > > Steve pointed out to a problem in Stackalytics: > https://twitter.com/stevebot/status/718185667709267969 > > It's pretty clear what's happening if you look here: >

Re: [openstack-dev] [all][stackalytics] Gaming the Stackalytics stats

On Fri, Apr 8, 2016 at 4:54 PM, Dolph Mathews wrote: > > > On Friday, April 8, 2016, John Dickinson wrote: > >> >> >> On 8 Apr 2016, at 13:35, Jeremy Stanley wrote: >> >> > On 2016-04-08 19:42:18 +0200 (+0200), Dmitry Tantsur wrote: >> >> There are many

Re: [openstack-dev] [all][stackalytics] Gaming the Stackalytics stats

On 04/08/2016 03:31 PM, Jeremy Stanley wrote: > Thanks for taking this up--some people just need > encouragement/suggestions for better ways to make an impact. On the > other hand, if you find that many of them have addresses at the same > company domain... well I guess we can find people higher

Re: [openstack-dev] [all][stackalytics] Gaming the Stackalytics stats

On Friday, April 8, 2016, John Dickinson wrote: > > > On 8 Apr 2016, at 13:35, Jeremy Stanley wrote: > > > On 2016-04-08 19:42:18 +0200 (+0200), Dmitry Tantsur wrote: > >> There are many ways to game a simple +1 counter, such as +1'ing changes > >> that already have at least 1x +2,

Re: [openstack-dev] [all][stackalytics] Gaming the Stackalytics stats

On 04/08/2016 04:39 PM, John Dickinson wrote: > > > On 8 Apr 2016, at 13:35, Jeremy Stanley wrote: > >> On 2016-04-08 19:42:18 +0200 (+0200), Dmitry Tantsur wrote: >>> There are many ways to game a simple +1 counter, such as +1'ing changes >>> that already have at least 1x +2, or which already

Re: [openstack-dev] [all][stackalytics] Gaming the Stackalytics stats

On 8 Apr 2016, at 13:35, Jeremy Stanley wrote: > On 2016-04-08 19:42:18 +0200 (+0200), Dmitry Tantsur wrote: >> There are many ways to game a simple +1 counter, such as +1'ing changes >> that already have at least 1x +2, or which already approved, or which need >> rechecking... > [...] > > The

Re: [openstack-dev] [all][stackalytics] Gaming the Stackalytics stats

On Fri, Apr 8, 2016 at 4:31 PM, Jeremy Stanley wrote: > On 2016-04-08 14:28:33 -0500 (-0500), Major Hayden wrote: >> I'll take a sample of the folks listed there and contact them. >> Hopefully I can provide some general results here soon. > > Thanks for taking this up--some

Re: [openstack-dev] [all][stackalytics] Gaming the Stackalytics stats

On 2016-04-08 19:42:18 +0200 (+0200), Dmitry Tantsur wrote: > There are many ways to game a simple +1 counter, such as +1'ing changes > that already have at least 1x +2, or which already approved, or which need > rechecking... [...] The behavior which baffles me, and also seems to be on the rise

Re: [openstack-dev] [all][stackalytics] Gaming the Stackalytics stats

On 2016-04-08 14:28:33 -0500 (-0500), Major Hayden wrote: > I'll take a sample of the folks listed there and contact them. > Hopefully I can provide some general results here soon. Thanks for taking this up--some people just need encouragement/suggestions for better ways to make an impact. On the

Re: [openstack-dev] [all][stackalytics] Gaming the Stackalytics stats

On 04/08/2016 03:28 PM, Major Hayden wrote: > On 04/08/2016 02:25 PM, Anita Kuno wrote: >> Nothing is stopping you from doing so. You can see the names and can >> find the emails of those engaged in this by following the gerrit link >> Dims posted in his first post. >> >> Perhaps as you say, the

Re: [openstack-dev] [all][stackalytics] Gaming the Stackalytics stats

On 04/08/2016 02:25 PM, Anita Kuno wrote: > Nothing is stopping you from doing so. You can see the names and can > find the emails of those engaged in this by following the gerrit link > Dims posted in his first post. > > Perhaps as you say, the personal touch may help them to learn how to >

Re: [openstack-dev] [all][stackalytics] Gaming the Stackalytics stats

On 04/08/2016 03:19 PM, Major Hayden wrote: > On 04/08/2016 02:04 PM, Doug Wiegley wrote: >> Are they using the numbers for some internal company purpose maybe? If so, >> how does it matter to any of us? >> >> Chasing this tail just takes time away from useful things, IMO. > > Although I

Re: [openstack-dev] [all][stackalytics] Gaming the Stackalytics stats

On 04/08/2016 02:04 PM, Doug Wiegley wrote: > Are they using the numbers for some internal company purpose maybe? If so, > how does it matter to any of us? > > Chasing this tail just takes time away from useful things, IMO. Although I understand the reasoning behind the effort underway in the

Re: [openstack-dev] [all][stackalytics] Gaming the Stackalytics stats

On 04/08/2016 03:04 PM, Doug Wiegley wrote: > >> On Apr 8, 2016, at 11:26 AM, Davanum Srinivas wrote: >> >> Team, >> >> Steve pointed out to a problem in Stackalytics: >> https://twitter.com/stevebot/status/718185667709267969 >> >> It's pretty clear what's happening if you

Re: [openstack-dev] [all][stackalytics] Gaming the Stackalytics stats

> On Apr 8, 2016, at 11:26 AM, Davanum Srinivas wrote: > > Team, > > Steve pointed out to a problem in Stackalytics: > https://twitter.com/stevebot/status/718185667709267969 > > It's pretty clear what's happening if you look here: >

Re: [openstack-dev] [all][stackalytics] Gaming the Stackalytics stats

On Fri, Apr 8, 2016 at 1:42 PM, Dmitry Tantsur wrote: > > 2016-04-08 19:26 GMT+02:00 Davanum Srinivas : > >> Team, >> >> Steve pointed out to a problem in Stackalytics: >> https://twitter.com/stevebot/status/718185667709267969 > > > There are many ways

Re: [openstack-dev] [all][stackalytics] Gaming the Stackalytics stats

On 04/08/2016 01:42 PM, Dmitry Tantsur wrote: > 2016-04-08 19:26 GMT+02:00 Davanum Srinivas : > >> Team, >> >> Steve pointed out to a problem in Stackalytics: >> https://twitter.com/stevebot/status/718185667709267969 > > > There are many ways to game a simple +1 counter, such

Re: [openstack-dev] [all][stackalytics] Gaming the Stackalytics stats

2016-04-08 19:26 GMT+02:00 Davanum Srinivas : > Team, > > Steve pointed out to a problem in Stackalytics: > https://twitter.com/stevebot/status/718185667709267969 There are many ways to game a simple +1 counter, such as +1'ing changes that already have at least 1x +2, or

Re: [openstack-dev] [all][stackalytics] Gaming the Stackalytics stats

On Fri, Apr 8, 2016 at 12:26 PM, Davanum Srinivas wrote: > Team, > > Steve pointed out to a problem in Stackalytics: > https://twitter.com/stevebot/status/718185667709267969 > > It's pretty clear what's happening if you look here: > >

[openstack-dev] [all][stackalytics] Gaming the Stackalytics stats

Team, Steve pointed out to a problem in Stackalytics: https://twitter.com/stevebot/status/718185667709267969 It's pretty clear what's happening if you look here: https://review.openstack.org/#/q/owner:openstack-infra%2540lists.openstack.org+status:open Here's the drastic step (i'd like to