On Friday, 22. May 2009 23:10:42 Mike Bush wrote:
> I have been watching this debate an I was wondering whether it could
> help to have 2 sets of trust values for each identity in a trust list,
> this could mean you could mark an identity as spamming or that I don't
> want to see these posts again as i find them objectionable.
This is what Credence did in the end for spam detection on Gnutella, so it
might fit the human psyche :)
People got the option to say "that's bad quality or misleading", "I don't like
it" or "that's spam".
For messages that could be
* "that ID posts spam"
* "that ID posts crap"
The first can easily be reviewed, the second is subjective. That would give a
soft group censorship option, but give the useful spam detection to everyone.
Best wishes,
Arne
PS: Yes, I mostly just tried to clarify Mikes post for me. I hope the mail's
useful to you nontheless.
--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
- singing a part of the history of free software -
http://infinite-hands.draketo.de
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part.
URL:
<https://emu.freenetproject.org/pipermail/devl/attachments/20090523/824a7d48/attachment.pgp>
