On Mon, 04 Jun 2001, Tavin Cole wrote: > On Mon, Jun 04, 2001 at 10:00:22PM -0500, thelema wrote: > > It sounds like the "unrequest" is just a vaguely defined first step > towards a web of trust based ranking/filtering system. Why not just > bite the bullet.. it's already been pointed out that this system would > have application far beyond finding Freenet keys anyway. > As a design decision, I'm all for writing a system that can be used to distribute freenet URIs, URLs, mojoids, and whatever kind of resource locator you want.
I'm also for bundling this software with freenet, so that people using freenet will be able to benefit from it with little hassle. But that's completely seperate from what kind of filtering we're going to use. The unrequest system is an attempt at keeping search results accurate. It's not at all ranking/filtering. A ranking/filtering system would be a completely different solution to the same problem. We should discuss the benefits/problems with each. Or we could just implement the various proposals and see which one works best/people use more. I really like this kind of solution because it's how a lot of free software works. Any good festures of one can/should be taken by the other. It's not formal software design, but it'll get us to the point where the average user can say "I like this" or "I don't like this" much faster. Thelema -- E-mail: thelema314 at bigfoot.com If you love something, set it free. GPG 1536g/B9C5D1F7 fpr:075A A3F7 F70B 1397 345D A67E 70AA 820B A806 F95D -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 232 bytes Desc: not available URL: <https://emu.freenetproject.org/pipermail/devl/attachments/20010604/87eacb9a/attachment.pgp>
