Core Points - The article discusses the prevalence of vote buying and manipulation in online voting systems, highlighting the emergence of a gray industry around this practice [1][2][4] - It emphasizes the negative impact of these practices on fairness and integrity in competitions, as well as the risks to personal information security [4][5] Group 1: Vote Buying Practices - Online voting has led to a rise in vote buying, with individuals and companies offering services to artificially inflate vote counts [1][2] - There are two main methods of vote manipulation: machine voting, which is cheaper but easier to detect, and manual voting, which is more expensive but harder to identify [2][3] - A specific example includes a company offering to generate 10,000 votes for 70 yuan, utilizing a network of individuals with multiple devices to ensure diverse IP addresses [2][3] Group 2: Industry Dynamics - The vote buying industry operates through various channels, including dedicated companies and informal groups on social media platforms [2][3] - Participants in these groups, referred to as "voters," earn money by assisting others in voting, often through small payments [3] - The industry is characterized by a detailed division of labor among its participants, including roles such as telemarketers and technical staff [3] Group 3: Challenges and Recommendations - The difficulty in proving vote buying and the high costs of enforcement contribute to the persistence of this issue [4] - Experts suggest that event organizers should limit voting to specific groups to enhance fairness and reduce the demand for paid voting services [5] - It is recommended that organizers carefully consider the implications of online voting to avoid compromising the integrity of their events [5]

Group 1 - The article highlights the prevalence of online voting manipulation, including vote buying and ballot stuffing, which has led to the emergence of a gray industry around these practices [1][2] - Instances of unfair competition due to vote buying are reported, with participants in contests experiencing significant discrepancies in vote counts, undermining the integrity of the events [1][2] - The existence of companies openly advertising vote manipulation services indicates a persistent issue, despite regulatory efforts to curb such practices [2][3] Group 2 - Vote manipulation methods include both machine-based and manual approaches, with machine voting being cheaper but easier to detect, while manual voting is more costly and harder to identify [2][3] - A specific example of a vote manipulation service is provided, where a company offers to generate 10,000 votes for 70 yuan, utilizing a network of individuals with multiple devices to ensure diverse IP addresses [2][3] - The article discusses the organization of "vote-for-pay" groups on social media, where participants are incentivized to vote for others in exchange for small payments, further complicating the integrity of online voting [3][4] Group 3 - The ongoing issue of vote buying and manipulation is attributed to the difficulty in gathering evidence and the high costs associated with enforcement, as well as the willingness of event organizers to overlook these practices for increased visibility [4][5] - Experts suggest that event organizers should limit the voting scope to specific groups to mitigate the risk of manipulation, emphasizing the need for careful consideration of online voting methods [4][5] - The article concludes that without demand for paid voting, the gray industry surrounding it would struggle to survive, highlighting the need for a reevaluation of online voting practices [5]