Join the new world

Hello eCanada,

As I am sure you are aware about, many writers in the eWorld now have the ability to do what is called "vote buying”. This is a process where a citizen or organization sends GOLD to another citizen, in exchange for a predetermined number of votes to be placed in an article of the "buyers" choosing. In many cases, this can be a good thing (as I will go into detail next about), but in the majority of cases, this can be a reliable source of spam!

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Pros Vs. Cons
Vote buying, has both positive and negative side effects, depending on factors, which include (a) the type of article, (b) the target audience of the article, and (c) the content of the article, in question.

Let's start by looking at the pros of this situation. In some cases, a person or organization will buy votes, to quickly (and reliably) get an important article (and by important, I mean one that will have an impact on the majority of the country - for example, battle orders) up into the top 5, to allow people to read it. Because let’s face it, how useful are battle orders (as an example), if no one is able to find them and/or read them (by not being in the top 5). Therefore in instances like this, vote buying can HELP the media.

The opposite of the above, is the abuse and the over-usage that the "vote buying" system receives. More times than not, a citizen or an organization will purchase votes for something that they feel is important... or something that they want to make public quickly (should it be a trolling article, for example). What I mean by this is, "vote purchasing" can be used as a SUBSTITUTE to having people vote up your article themselves. Literally, there is nothing stopping someone from buying article votes (minus the cost) - so what is to stop someone from doing it? After all, if they know that their "article content" isn't going to be put over well with the public; he/she will almost instantly buy votes, as a way to (a) rub it in the public's faces (if a "troll" article, for example), and (b) to eliminate the middle man factor (the general public who can vote on articles).

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Impacts of "Vote Buying"
There are considerable side-effects (both positive and negative) that come from "vote buying", some of which have an effect on just a few people, and some that have an effect on a large group of people, to some that effect the entire field of media!

In some instances, the outcome can be positive. For example (as mentioned earlier), votes can be purchased for "quality articles", meaning that the article in question would make it to the top 5 much faster than if votes were not purchased for it. Since the article makes it to the top 5 quicker, this also means that more people are going to see it, which means more exposure. Now, exposure of this sort of article (remember, a QUALITY article) is good, since it better INFORMS people, and allows people to stay further updated on the "important" news of the eCountry and eWorld.

At the same time however, if we as a country can promote the usage of vote buying for "good" articles (though one could argue what a "good" article is - which in my mind, is an article that INFORMS people of IMPORTANT events), we could greatly reduce the number of "troll" articles that we see in the top 5.

On the other hand, there are several negative outcomes. One major negative outcome, is that when votes are purchased for an article (regardless if the article is an "important" article or not), the "buyer" is technically forcing his or her article into the top five. This means that another article (which let's say is close to being in the top 5 - yet votes were not purchased for it) is now placed even further back in the "top article" listing, meaning its chances of being exposed in the top 5 in a "non-forcible" manner, have just been greatly reduced. After all, could you really consider that fair?

Again, I stress the point of "over usage" and "abuse", meaning that the exact opposite can happen. People (if they have enough money), can buy votes for just about any article, meaning that just about any article has the exact same chance of being exposed and being placed in the top 5 article listing. The effect of this, is that a "troll" article can then be exposed to create further drama, chaos, and mayhem in a country; which as we all know - is never a good thing.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Conclusion
So what is the verdict? Is it helpful or hurtful?

In the end, regardless of what kind of article you are getting votes purchased for, I still firmly believe that vote purchasing HURTS more than it helps. Because regardless of the content of an actual article, you are still "forcing" your way into the top 5 in an unfair way, and you are still "influencing" what people SHOULD and SHOULD NOT be reading - instead of letting the citizens themselves vote up articles that they think are important, and should be read by everyone.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Cheers,
AMM