ye guys, what about that web-of-trust theory, google used in its new "community" concept, like: everyone is trusted, that got invited by someone already trusted. but maybe thats overshot for what you guys want? regards, johannes
> -----Original Message----- > From: Theo Van Dinter [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Thursday, July 15, 2004 9:46 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: wiki spam > > > On Fri, Jul 16, 2004 at 07:38:17AM +1200, Sidney Markowitz wrote: > > Umm, I'm hoping for something that has a bit less impact on the > human UI > > while only affecting the robots. Wikis have been working fine without > > having to identify or trust the humans. (I know you were being > > sarcastic, but I want to point out that the direction to go in is _not_ > > to increase trust levels in the people who make edits). > > Heh. Actually, I was only partially sarcastic. I've been on a > philosophical thought path about trust and related issues recently. > > But yeah, cryptographic signing would make the whole concept of the > wiki kind of moot given the current state of things, imo. We do want > in some measure to require a slightly higher trust level that the edit > coming in is valid, though, such as simple authentication or something. > > -- > Randomly Generated Tagline: > Gimme two brains on drugs, over easy, and bacon... >
