Spyke

Syndicated from the fediverse. Read and engage on the original instance.

View original on lemmings.world
yepowertrippinbastards·Ye Power Trippin' BastardsbyProudAntifa

DonaldJMusk is running dozens of accounts

UniversalMonk, PapaSkwat, DonaldJMusk, TheSilentNickel, QuantumTickler, his communities are full of Astro turfing sock puppets.

EDIT: My list of sock puppets. I doubt it's perfect and I may have picked up a few that weren't him

[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]

To the mods of this comm, I understand this isn't a post complaining about a mod action taken against me. It's hardly even a complaint against a mod, although he does mod a handful of communities. I know it's a hard-to-prove personal message that the accused will deny sending or say was a joke he told a troll, his word vs mine. But this is beyond the usual actions mods take. This is abuse of the fediverse, harrassment, ban evasion, and vote manipulation.

I believe the situation to be self evident even without this message that the users who frequent DonaldJMusk's comms are primarily him with a new username on a new server and they're leaking out into other communities with ill intent.

If action is to be taken against this post, I ask that it be locked and not deleted.

View original on lemmings.world
231

205 replies

Sorry but this is out of scope for this community. Also y'all can't behave. Reminder that the burden of proof is on the accuser. You can't prove a negative (i.e. "prove such-and-such isn't Universal Monk")

12
lemmy.world

Sometimes when I feel like a failure or I’m not applying myself enough in life, then I read shit like this and realize I’m doing just fine .

103

Considering we're not anything like the users who spin bots to harass people, we're probably doing pretty okay. I'm weird but I'm not that weird.

18
lemmy.world

It's kind of funny that he thinks people don't know that he's a reactionary wet fart. Anyone who watches the stupid side of the threadiverse with any kind of regularity can see the pattern.

He thinks he's being subtle, but Lemmy smells out right-wing bullshit better than most places on the Web. Nobody likes what he's selling.

66
lemmings.world

He's after a captive audience because we know better. He thinks his ideas, or maybe just his chaos, is more acceptable when said by somebody that isn't him but NOBODY is buying his anti-Luigi comments.

31
lemmy.world

Yeah, this place isn't Reddit; there's not a culture of ironic fascism to hide behind on Lemmy/ Piefed.

It's part of why I like it here.

40
dilreply

The type of person who joined lemmy because they were tired of propoganda is not about to fall for that same proproganda, especially to this mf who think he is being subtle

15
anarchist.nexus

Obligatory fuck UniversalMonk and his stupid AI character in each of his accounts' pfp. Dude is easily the worst parts of the fediverse wrapped up in a shit bow. Just block lemmy.today its a fascist instance. Same with the lemmyusa.today one or whatever.

49
Skavaureply
piefed.social

The bigger problem here is that lemmy.today is being used as a gateway for astroturfing. That's the issue that needs fixing here.

37
Tyrqreply
lemmy.dbzer0.com

Isn't the point of the federation to enable defederating rogue instances, or am I wrong on that?

18
frongtreply
lemmy.zip

Hot take: this is why automatic federation is a bad idea. Even if your malicious instance gets defederated, you can just spin up a new one!

21

I imagine eventually automatic federation will stop being a thing for a lot of instances.

19
Skavaureply
piefed.social

Yes. That was precisely what I was getting at there lol.

8

yea it is, after the tankies triad were defederedated from most instances, i suspect some of those users are making new accounts in the other instances to troll.

-5

I never liked the idea of blocking. Shoving my fingers in my ears and singing "la la la" allows these antics to continue unchallenged. Besides, they're not all on one instance.

20
lemmy.today

I picked Lemmy.today because it allows me to block instances instead of the admins deciding which to defed from. But I do acknowledge that it allows a lot of freaks in.

15
Taleyareply
aussie.zone

Aussie.zone lets you block instances too. And it's not facist.

8
lemmy.today

Are the admins of lemmy.today shown to be fascist? I haven't heard anything about that. I guess if you consider them allowing Monk to do this, they're at least allowing it

6
Buelldozerreply
lemmy.today

Hi, Admin from lemmy.today here. I'm certainly not a fascist and I wouldn't be associated with any instance or participate on an Admin Team that is.

Speaking of Admin Teams I think every member of ours (including me) has separately investigated the accusation that DJM and UM are the same person and to date none of us have come up with anything. We have engaged with several Lemmy users from other instances who claimed to have proof but none of them provided anything other than conjecture and accusation.

If you, or anyone else, actually has some proof feel free to message any member of the lemmy.today admin team.

11

Good luck getting the people who don't like giving evidence to change their minds to evidence or give you any. They still haven't given any despite insisting they have it.

5

not neccesarily, but some of the communities are problematic, like politics and some other political type instances, its not like super tankie, but they do like to form a opinion that they dont like changing in some of them, and have banned people, especially when it comes to gaza/israel, they misinterpret people way too much, basically labeling them antisemitic if they dont agree with you.

3

Well said. They know it’s UM, and they actively chose to allows it fuck that instance.

-1
Cortreply
lemmy.world

Did they actually confirm it wasn't UM, or did they say there wasn't enough evidence to confirm it was UM?

11
Rhoerireply
lemmy.world

No proof doesn’t mean proof he isn’t. And what they call no proof is bullshit. There’s plenty of proof.

3
Rhoerireply
lemmy.world

Tf? Dude…. lol! The reach you’ll shoot for to think you have a point is astounding!

0
Sanctusreply
anarchist.nexus

And this admin, do they administer all of these instances? Or just one of them?

5

Or rather, this admin, do they have a WAF? Are they analyzing the traffic that comes in? Are the sure they're checking every point of interaction for consistency? If no, then they didn't really "Check".

5
Sanctusreply
anarchist.nexus

Better, but he could just be using a device with a VPN. I have enough old ass computers in my house to do the same thing.

3
th3raid0rreply
tucson.social

This admin will state that UM is a bot. And wouldn't ya know it some of the other signup attempts used the alt names. Weird that.

I don't think many admins know infosec practices very well to be frank.

2
th3raid0rreply
tucson.social

Nooope, I have IP data, email logs, and other things. However, much of the data had fallen off my WAF retention period. Oddly convenient how you just assume I don't have these things rather than keeping them close because I don't want the bots to figure out how I'm catching them.

When you conveniently leave out that providing proof reduces an admins ability to re-use certain detection methods, it makes me pretty convinced you're complicit.

5

When you conveniently leave out that providing proof reduces an admins ability to re-use certain detection methods

How the heck would anyone but you know that your proof would reveal your detection method? That's not a given.

And what's the point of collecting proof if the only way you have to convince others is "trust me bro, I've got the evidence, but you can't see it, my dog ate it."

And then when asked for proof you jump to implicate the person asking for proof? That's terrible form. We have an instance rule against bad-jacketing users:

  • Don’t be shitty to each other. i.e. [...] or bad-jacketing is bannable.
10

Well, You're more than welcome to reach out on more secure comms, such as matrix to get the proof! It's strange how that's basically standard for most of the other respectable instances, but not here.

1

Weird how he's just not gonna give it away. I'm sure any day now they'll have proof he's a robot and also a Tankie and also a fascist and also a shill and also...

-2
th3raid0rreply
tucson.social

Give the documents then? And am I a bot now too?

Interesting how you continue to leave out the security implications of posting this publicly.

Odd that.

I know not if you are a bot, you aren't on my instance, nor would it be likely you could get through my process.

I do know that you are awfully defensive of sockpuppet like behavior though.

0

The sock puppet behavior of... One user being harassed by users and defending them? The sock puppet behavior of... Wanting screenshots?

Hey @[email protected] is it possible to take screenshots that would prove something without being a security leak?

Like somehow you claim he signed up with the same email. Or same address, or anything. But no proof because it's a security risk.

Yeah I have Bigfoot in my basement. No you can't see him. No I can't give you photographs. Just take my word for it. Why yes others have said it without proof before but I'm different.

1
Rhoerireply
lemmy.world

You have ZERO admins with proof he’s not.

-2
Rhoerireply
lemmy.world

Again, not finding evidence he is- isn’t proof he isn’t. They NEVER once said he’s not- they said they didn’t find proof.

And they didn’t find any because they didn’t even fucking bother to look- because they’re someone that HAD proof and they never talked to him. So go ahead and fuck all the way off with this bullshit.

And….

LMFAO! I’m a republican because I think you’re full of shit? My god, how are you not embarrassed by your own smug bullshit?

2
lemmy.world

Reminds me of a post I read from a Russian tourist that visited Warsaw who was pissed off that the city was so nice and clean, whereas most of Russia is an unkempt shitheap.

Mind you he was not mad that Russia was a shitheap, he was mad that _Poland was not _

22
lemmy.world

I tagged a couple more a while back that I thought might be him.

34
lemmings.world

PhilipsHurtFeelings and WilliamFBuckley are on my short list too. I have my suspicions about barrygoldwater, his trans best friend. Any account that has ever posted in a greenparty comm or there's a third_party one out there now too he's started.

21

BarryGoldwater is 100%. If I remember correctly DJM and Barry accounts were created at the same time. Like minutes apart with same shitty AI avatar and everything.

21

Barrygoldwater is a bot associated with UM. UM also is associated with CM0002 from an IP standpoint given the last "bot signup attack" I experienced. (Fun fact they use barrygoldwater in their email they use to sign up from)

5
lemmy.world

You can usually tell them because they all have similarly styled AI generated avatars and some random libertarian quote in their bio.

27
lemmings.world

"Why are you mad at me? I didn't write the article." or talking about Lemmy as if we're all one big 70-IQ liberal or posting 90% in communities he mods. He's not good at it, but it's happening nonetheless.

22

I'd just like to add that piefed.social, Rimu has already banned a lot of these accounts.

25

Just a reminder to this individual.

You have to make dozens of clone accounts to make it appear as though your opinion is agreed with.

We don't. Nice cope.

24
lemmy.world

It’s that no-lifer, UniversalMonk. How do people not know this? That dude threatened me in PM. It’s what got him banned among other things.

20
lemmy.today

seems like he has shown up in this thread, and apparently some other accounts are defending him, its probally all him to.

4

I wouldn’t at all be surprised. Dude is fucking obnoxious.

6

Who is also his accounts? Point to them, please. Evidence is required for claims.

EDIT: If anyone who demands evidence is also guilty of the crime, the entire idea of a justice system is corrupt for you.

-1
lemmy.world

I don't really take time to memorize people like this unless theres an ongoing push to hold them accountable outside the internet.

Looking at his post history he seems to post a mix of ragebait and actual socialist rhetoric so would I be wrong for calling him a tankie?

3
Rhoerireply
lemmy.world

He’s just a troll. There’s been plenty of evidence who he is. The admins of his instance won’t do shit about it because they pretend there’s nothing connecting him.

4
lemmy.world

Lemmy.Today won't? Checks out, those losers are still federated to Hexbear and ML. Definite Tankie.

-3

Technically we're federated with everyone. That's actually why I joined this instance - so that I could block them instead of having the admins in control via defederation.

8

Meanwhile Hexbear is still raiding us for not being Tankie. Somehow we're both Tankies but not far left enough to be Tankies.

5

Tankies are weirdos but they aren't far right. They're dipshits but not far right.

They said we somehow are to the right of them for not praising stalin and saying killing anarchists was bad.

It's amazing, we're tankies to .world but Tankies think we're liberals.

5
lemmings.world

He has a pension penchant for creating accounts mocking people that troll him such as QuantumTickle, pooperNickel, PapaSkwat, DarkDecay, and probably others. Sometimes he steals their name, sometimes he is almost original.

18
lemmings.world

Him, grok, it's hard to tell. But it's his actions that speak the loudest.

15

Intentionally mispelling things to 'prove' that you're human is a common enough meme that it would be in the AI training material of any LLM that is destined to be an Internet troll bot.

9
pawb.social

ahhh that makes sense. the most upsetting thing to me is how much of his own time he’s wasting. like literally everyone who sees his stuff immediately clocks him as either playing a character, or too stupid to interact with.

just a sad, sad person.

18

That guy sounds like a complete cunt. Absolute waste of oxygen. Here's hoping horrific things happen to him and his team of turds. Enjoy hell, cyka.

17

Full transcript of message:

The downvotes don't mean anything anyway, cuz the articles are still right there in community, comrade aaron

Don't worry, im not celebrating that a special team now has 300 different names on here on lemmy. no not me. I wouldnever celebrate such a psyops. i wouldnt be part of that,yes?

isnt that great? 30 people. just 10 names each. now 300 accounts. all acting liberal getting liberal respect. Then slowly surely changing minds as we bring out flaws of liberal .

And they r hiri8ng more. pay very good for here.

Not that I have anything to do w that.but it is so funny how its all happening under Lemmys eyes and no one can stop it.

news articles here and there. they seem liberal or neutral. then little by little they change. no one even notice.

All happengin and no one even knows.

not that i havetowrry since i have nothing to do with that.

No, not me. Just little old me here in my corner being ban happy. no bother to anyone. no cares here.

i would never lead a a team of 30 people to creat 300 accounts just to change minds of pity americans.

dont worry comrade aaron about me. I am just being quiet and ban happy here in my little corner.

dont worry because i woudl never have teams of peole not getting banned in all the other communities. some that you have argue about, but they keep us there.

they are not getitn banned anywhere. they are playing verygood game of tricking lemmy.

But not me. not little oldme, aaron.

you have never ever gotten rid of me and you never will. isnt that good news,comrade aaron?

lemmy is in land of free so no law broken just becuae ur mad. isn't that funny? differning opinions are good, yes?

будь здоров aaron. no need to worry about me little old me in my quiet corner no bother

hahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha

16
lemmy.zip

Yeah I downvoted several of his more daring lies and now he follows me around everywhere under the PapaSkwat name.

He calls you Aaron, too, huh?

16

He messaged me like he knew me. I think he tells himself that he only has 1 person downvoting his stuff. Maybe there was an Aaron in the past? I don't really care, I just want him to fuck off.

14

I posted about this a month or so ago. I only uncovered PapaSkwat at the time. DJM was supposedly targeted by a downvote botnet months ago and he suspected a ![email protected], but considering how he's letting a user with that name post in his comms I'm willing to bet that DonaldJMusk did it to himself to garner pity.

Well, he certainly has my pity.

15
Skavaureply
piefed.social

You should put in the instances they're operating from so people can investigate. Or are you saying they're all from every instance that comes up in search?

14
lemmings.world

I usually find them through going to the modlog, typing in the username, and letting the autocomplete tell me what instances that username exists on. They're all over the place. I will admit the [email protected] was me counter-trolling but I am not finding Lemmy worth the fight.

7
Skavaureply
piefed.social

Okay, yeah, most of the major communities here where they operate from are lemmy.today and hilariouschaos.

Unmoderated instances.

19
Skavaureply
piefed.social

Yeah, I would advise you to delete your alt mirroring him because it makes it harder to isolate for him.

14
Skavaureply
piefed.social

Low moderated might be a better way of putting it.

2

Fair. I'm sure it will be challenging to retain our low touch policy as the instance and / or the lemmiverse continues to grow. The laissez-faire approach only works for so long.

6
lemmy.world

Thanks for posting this. UniversalMonk is a cancerous cunt.

12
th3raid0rreply
tucson.social

Fuck all, but luckily TrickDacy is here to instantly believe any baseless accusation.

As an admin who had to fend off UM's bot signups - it's definitely not unfounded.

6

How do you know they are UM's bots? Do you have clear evidence? Because it all seems like supposition at this point. Otherwise it's entirely plausible someone is just trolling him.

0
th3raid0rreply
tucson.social

Do I know if they are the exact same individual - no - I can't know that because I don't have IP information from other instances. To use this limitation as a bludgeon is dishonest. Admins that host sockpuppets and know it aren't likely to ever reveal this information.

Do I have clear evidence that the UM/CM0002/BarryGoldWater user(s) that attempted signup on my instance are bots - Oh definitely yes.

Now, I see you are a mod not an admin. I do not typically share my methods with non-admins, and definitely not over a public forum like this.

If the dbzer0 admin wants my supporting information, they may DM me with their preferred matrix handle/server, and i will happily discuss there.

3

They are an admin, it might not be federating. Here I can't see you're an admin but on your instance I can. I think Lemmy just bugs out on role tags.

4

Do I know if they are the exact same individual - no - I can’t know that because I don’t have IP information from other instances.

Well that is entirely what I was trying to find out. So to be perfectly clear, you have NO evidence that the person behind these bots is Universal Monk? But you came here to point the finger anyway.

To use this limitation as a bludgeon is dishonest.

I beg to differ. Because literally anyone could be behind bot signups on your instance. But you came in here and emphatically accused Universal Monk, based on what?

So my question is, what sort of person would use bots to signup under their own name? It makes no sense, they obviously wouldn't. But someone might well use the name(s) of people they want to subject to ongoing harassment. In what reality is that the less likely scenario?

I do not typically share my methods with non-admins, and definitely not over a public forum like this.

Just to clarify, I never asked you to post it publicly, matrix would be fine. But I think it's pretty unfair to level an accusation at someone publicly and then refuse to provide the evidence for it being that user. There is a power differential at play here and there are real life negative consequences for the user being accused.

P.S. Praise be to the Flying Spaghetti Monster we aren't considered a "respectable instance"

0
lemmings.world
  • They post mainly in comms he or another sock puppet of his mods
  • Any comment against his post/comment is responded with:
    • "I didn't write the article"
    • "I like the article"
    • "Lemmy will hate this"
  • Extremely authoritarian, contrarian
  • Taking over small, abandoned comms like WNBA, science, greenparty, etc.
  • Lies in the modlog saying you were trolling, serial downvoting, ban evading, etc
  • Telling other people how they feel about things
  • Posting in Positivity comms and lamenting the people who downvote everything he posts
  • Judging people by how they vote, posts lemvotes.org like it's some kinda gotcha
  • "Thanks, friend!"
22

Yeah before I really knew who he was and what he was doing I'd comment on his posts, mainly because I don't like letting obviously misleading right wing bullshit to just stand unopposed, but his responses were always "I like this." The post could have been "DJT punted a newborn baby" and he'd reply "I like what Trump is doing." So I gave up commenting on anything he posts.

14
cowfodderreply
lemmy.world

In UM/DJT's case it's more that his writing style (misspelled word salad) gives him away.

16

How do you identify sock puppets? Are they all the same IP?

From an Admin perspective, most botnets do a good job of distributing most of their traffic. But the key is they don't distribute ALL of their traffic.

From a user perspective my advice is generally "if it quacks like a duck"...

That is, is the persona that of an extreme stereotype? Are they overly contrarian? Is what they are doing destructive to those who claim similar identities? Then it's likely a sockpuppet.

And if it isn't - oh well, treat them like one anyways - it's better for society that way.

4

I bet this person has dozens of friends whom they hang out with on a regular basis, a successful career, active sex life with a loving partner and proud parents.

This person is definitely not some self isolating weirdo that beats off to anime 4-8 times a day on a light week.

10

Hey hey now don't insult people that beat off to anime 8 times a day like that

8

I mean, the глупый isn't wrong about the tactics.

Perhaps our comrade here got a bit too drunk and violated opsec and is now on his way to meet a Ukrainian drone like the rest of his recently deceased countrymen.

9
kbin.earth

So is cm0002 but no one seems to mind besides the troika and one other instance.

8
Skavaureply
piefed.social

Cm0002 isn't doing it to astroturf though, although a lot of people do mind.

16
Maevereply
kbin.earth

It's spammy, doesn't credit the OPs, looks a lot like astroturfing, and is plain wrong, but since it's against the original instances, it's not only tolerated, but encouraged and applauded.

And imo that's what karma is, thinking it's somehow different when I or someone I like does it against someone I don't like, kind of like certain treaties and other interstate agreements. And then people marvel the world is gone to rubbish, or complain when it's done to them.

5
Skavaureply
piefed.social

I've seen a lot of people complain about it. But regardless of your position, this particular situation is worse. This is someone essentially admitting to astroturfing.

7
Skavaureply
piefed.social

Yes, I do view this as different. If specific servers want to ban all cm0002's on sight - that's up to them. But I view this effort as much more damaging and damaging beyond being annoying to people on the Fediverse.

7
Maevereply
kbin.earth

I view it as karma, the unlearned lesson, that led all of us, to borrow a biblical expression, that led to us having corrupt politicians.

To explain: We were okay with Dems insider trading because "it was different," and "not as bad as." So corruption grew and we got what we got. And we will keep getting that until we hold ourselves and "our side" to the same standards we expect from others, from our plug on the corner to blowing up Venezuelan fishermen to combat drugs, but it's really for oil and rare earths, or genociding Palestinians because Democrats wrong their hands while persuing genocidal policies through a state fighting proxy wars on our behalf because of our "interests in the area."

Because if we refuse to root it out of ourselves and "ours," why on earth would "they and theirs" root it out in themselves, giving us an unfair advantage? Escalation continues, and we are seeing a very real chance of nuclear holocaust now, because it's always different when it's us, of the "us" saying so.

And yet a few do hold ourselves and ours accountable. That's why the troika isn't engaging in cm002 tactics, and Iran didn't obliterate an illegal state engaging in war crimes, including genocide, despite having the weapons and skill to anahilate everyone, disregarding women and children in the area, as Israel did to Palestine.

But do you. And marvel how the world is now on the brink of MAD.

-1

I didn't say anyone should be "okay" with CM's behaviour. People are welcome to make similar threads here, and petition other admins of instances.

In any case, whatever hypocrisy here you say doesn't matter. Whether or not CM is stopped or not wouldn't stop DonaldJMusk from doing this. They are not connected. He wouldn't see that CM is banned and think "Well gee, I won't bother them!" That's not how any of this works.

2
th3raid0rreply
tucson.social

CM0002 may not be shaking the cage as hard, but he is still a bot - and associated with the same botnet when I got a burst of signups for UM and his alts.

-1
Maevereply
kbin.earth

Interesting. If you can screenshot the logs and share them, maybe admins who allow this corruption will take appropriate action.

3
lemmings.world

Out with it then. If there's 300, and they're run by other people, we'll need more than subjectivity.

2
lemmy.world

Here you go: https://codeberg.org/sillyhonu/lemmy-vote-analyzer

@[email protected]

I needed a bit to pull it from the various scripts where I built up parts of it and organize it into a repo. But now its done.

I built it in part to do what I think you are looking for here, which is to detect "upvote" or "downvote" networks, and eventually plan to do a sentiment analysis project based on these networks.

However, I would strongly suggest not projecting onto these results that things are "absolutely" bots or brigaders, or whatever. Reality is that actually, many people upvoting or downvoting is just a part of social media. Many times people have accused Monk of sockpuppeting, but I haven't seen concrete evidence of this beyond some cursory looks into the matter. I'm mostly interested in the more traditional organic networks of coordinated behavior (relative to the content of the post). But you should be able to use this to look for more malicious stuff.

Results of this thread: ::: spoiler spoiler

Community 5: 9 members Edges: 24, Density: 0.667 Avg down weight: 0.005994 Down/Up ratio: 0.06 Suspicion score: 39.96 Members: [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected]

================================================================================ Community 3: 6 members Edges: 9, Density: 0.600 Avg down weight: 0.006017 Down/Up ratio: 0.92 Suspicion score: 36.10 Members: [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected]

================================================================================ Community 1: 22 members Edges: 75, Density: 0.325 Avg down weight: 0.001563 Down/Up ratio: 0.08 Suspicion score: 5.07 Members: [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected]

================================================================================ Community 4: 49 members Edges: 234, Density: 0.199 Avg down weight: 0.001628 Down/Up ratio: 0.17 Suspicion score: 3.24 Sample (first 25): [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected]

================================================================================ Community 2: 28 members Edges: 82, Density: 0.217 Avg down weight: 0.001291 Down/Up ratio: 0.10 Suspicion score: 2.80 Sample (first 25): [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected] :::

5
JackbyDevreply
programming.dev

Formatted

::: spoiler spoiler

================================================================================
Community 5: 9 members
  Edges: 24, Density: 0.667
  Avg down weight: 0.005994
  Down/Up ratio: 0.06
  Suspicion score: 39.96
  Members: [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected]

================================================================================
Community 3: 6 members
  Edges: 9, Density: 0.600
  Avg down weight: 0.006017
  Down/Up ratio: 0.92
  Suspicion score: 36.10
  Members: [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected]

================================================================================
Community 1: 22 members
  Edges: 75, Density: 0.325
  Avg down weight: 0.001563
  Down/Up ratio: 0.08
  Suspicion score: 5.07
  Members: [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected]

================================================================================
Community 4: 49 members
  Edges: 234, Density: 0.199
  Avg down weight: 0.001628
  Down/Up ratio: 0.17
  Suspicion score: 3.24
  Sample (first 25): [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected]

================================================================================
Community 2: 28 members
  Edges: 82, Density: 0.217
  Avg down weight: 0.001291
  Down/Up ratio: 0.10
  Suspicion score: 2.80
  Sample (first 25): [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected]

:::

6

Much nice, thanks.

Some explanation. Density is effectively a measure of how "compact" a given community within the system is. Its the average rate of "agreement" for any given vote direction (weighted or unweighted). You could think of it as being how "concerted" a group of voters are.

You have some options with how you build the networks. You can use just upvotes, just downvotes, or you can 'weight" the upvotes or downvotes. Weighting is important because some users just vote, way way more than others. In fact, there are users you can find in the wild who have practically never commented or posted, but vote on practically everything they see. Its not a safe assumption to make to suggest that everyone votes in the same manner or that voting as a tool is used the same way by all users.

In this network, we did "weighted" downvotes, so the weights are proportioned by the users total down-votes cast.

So the "Avg down weight" can be considered the "total average shared percent of user downvotes". So in that first community, about half a percent of the communities total average downvotes are in concert.

You can of course use upvotes, or unweighted down or upvotes, and I'm just pushing a version now to do a k-partite version of the same thing with individual weights, so just.. go nuts if you like.

Suspicion score is finally:

density* average_down_scaled* 10000

This means groups with high density and high downvote coordination have higher suspicion socres. The 10000 is just to make the number something easier on the eyes.

5

Hey look it's proof of innocence (because it's always guilty until proven innocent for such people) and they're ignoring it. Wild how that happens.

-1
th3raid0rreply
tucson.social

I have a more effective way of confirming things like this if interested…

Probably not more effective than my method - but you need to be an instance admin to be able to use my method.

-1

And because if that, it's all ignored. Math is a lie.

Edit: Rhoeri if you can downvote me, you can at least read the mathematical proof that says you could be wrong. Oh well, sorry for giving more proof you don't like.

-5

Is there an easy way to mass-block all these names in Voyager, or will I have to just copy and paste them one by one?

6
Buelldozerreply
lemmy.today

I'm an Admin on lemmy.today and the accusation that DJM is UM (and others) occasionally comes up. Both I and @[email protected] have looked into it and neither of us have ever been able to find any kind of proof.

I've engaged with several Lemmy users who supposedly had proof but they were unable to provide anything better than what OP has up above. It's always loose conjecture and "trust me, bro".

Yes the DJM account is annoying but that's not enough to get banned from our instance.

9
lemmings.world

Ok, now do DonaldJMusk and the other dozen accounts.

I know you can't because of them being on other servers that aren't playing ball but that kinda feels like the point.

You're just the bartender, but once this conversation is over I'm done with Lemmy. Not your instance, all of Lemmy. He's following and harassing me everywhere and the most you can do is call him annoying.

Fuck you.

1

I insulted this idiot once or twice, and they didn't follow me around. I'm curious how hard you went in the paint.

Edit: someone linked my mod file and apparently that idiot perma banned me from a dozen communities I have never interacted with. So my point is moot.

6
Buelldozerreply
lemmy.today

Ok, now do DonaldJMusk and the other dozen accounts.

When I say "DJM" I am referring to DonaldJMusk.

He’s following and harassing me everywhere and the most you can do is call him annoying.

You obviously have another account because the one you're commenting from is only 6 hours old, has just 1 post (this one) and only 17 comments (all in here). I checked because I wanted to see one of these accounts harassing you and look into it. Unfortunately there's nothing for me to see so there's nothing I can do.

My suggestion would be to report the user accounts that are causing you grief to the admins of the accounts home instance and then block them. Takes like 15 seconds to do both of those actions.

Fuck you.

Sadly my wife isn't into sharing, otherwise I might be interested. 😘

3
lemmy.today

Hey admin! I'm curious. I started an argument with someone and they mentioned my mod file. I'm still super new here and don't quite understand what that means. Can you explain it and/or tell me how terrible of a person I am based solely on that file?

3

And big lol at all the "serial down voting" bans. I thought voting was public, and I do not down vote often.

I must've seriously pissed off a prolific mod.

2
  • Day old account
  • Op makes post that has loose evidence
  • OP makes claim and gives no proof of that claim
  • OP is told their evidence doesn't make sense by two different admins independently
  • OP then leaves because of it
  • People then come in believing the thing made up and attack users who give them proof otherwise, like OP.

Bravo. And they say we're the bots. Or Tankies. But Hexbear said we're bad guys for not being Tankie enough. What a wild 48 hours it's been for us. Somehow too far left but not left enough. Somehow asking for proof is a lie.

0

That last sentence is why I'm a big fan! Let idiots get ratio'd. But I also wonder why our very laissez faire instance gets ddos'd so often.

1

First of all- BULLSHIT. I have brought evidence to you and you chose to dismiss it.

And I told you- you could have talked to JordanLund, he’s got the proof. You chose not to. You’re protecting him.

1
th3raid0rreply
tucson.social

Yeah, whatever man - I had a huge "attack" one day, and wouldn't you know, about 4-5 of the usernames listed here were involved in that. Odd that. Also, their traffic patterns were hugely suspect.

I spent hours into investigating that "perhaps these are real users" and nope, they fell right into my honeypot routes. UM and CM0002 are bots, full stop.

They also aren't Tucsonans, which is why I didn't approve their signup.

I don't think many admins actually know how to properly audit for bots - and honestly, that problem is harder when you're a global instance.

It's part of why I don't think global instances will work for the fediverse, too vulnerable to bot manipulation. We need proof of humanity - and that scales better with local nodes.

1
th3raid0rreply
tucson.social

Admin of tucson.social here - when UM signed up at tucson.social he made some crucial mistakes that made him easy to identify as a bot. Unfortunately, since this affects my security posture, I'm not keen on publicly posting what it is as he still makes the same mistakes.

However, let me add this - there are multiple places we should be validating are accessed from the same IP in a registration flow - all to many bot farms centralize certain aspects of their operations and use the same IP every time for only certain parts of a given flow.

I'll also add that many admins are either stupid about site security, or actively complicit in the bot problem.

7