TIME: 4chan founder most influential person

http://www.time.com/time/arts/article/0,8599,1894028,00.html

Time writes the results of their online poll for the world's most influential person.

It seems pretty obvious that this poll was raided by 4chan's devoted followers to make Moot (4chan founder's screen name) #1.

The details of how the voting procedure was rigged: http://musicmachinery.com/tag/4chan/

At one point, the votes actually spelled out acronyms:

I believe online polls are rarely reliable to create an accurate perception of the public's opinion. Because it's so easy to manipulate votes with tools and even with word verification generators, this poll has shown the pointlessness of internet polls.

I also feel it's the same way about online petitions as well. Anyone can create a petition and artificially show that there are many varied signatures when it's actually all signed ten thousand times by one person.

What do you guys feel about the media showing online polls in their content to portray the public's perception about various topics? I find it amazing how an organization like 4chan has such a devoted group of followers that can really make things happen on the internet.

Eric Chang wrote:What do you guys feel about the media showing online polls in their content to portray the public's perception about various topics? I find it amazing how an organization like 4chan has such a devoted group of followers that can really make things happen on the internet.

The idea of an online poll is more or less invalidated by its susceptibility to bots, hacks, and general skullduggery.

It would be great if 4chan was capable of "making things happen" other than trolling anybody who even speaks of them. This forum included. Unfortunately, 4chan is the unmasked face of the internet: Masses of people granted anonymity and a means of coordinating invariably act like a bunch of psychotic children. 4chan has never once done anything of benefit to anyone, only destroy other people's work.