* Michael Rogers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2007-08-19 23:10:35]: > Matthew Toseland wrote: > > On Thursday 16 August 2007 00:22, Michael Rogers wrote: > >> I agree, fragmentation is a very important issue. Hopefully there will > >> be enough newbies (who have to disable filtering and trawl through the > >> spam until they've established themselves in the web of trust) to knit > >> the community back together if it fragments. "If there is hope, it lies > >> in the n00bs." > > > > Why must hope lie in the n00bs? If they have to trawl through all the spam > > then they're lost already - they're out the door, they're uninstalling. > > Probably true, but unavoidable as far as I can see. Newbies don't know > who to trust, so they have no way to filter spam. The only way to decide > who to trust is to read some messages. That means filtering will have to > be disabled by default, and newbies will have to spend a while trawling > through spam before enabling it. > > Once you've found a few non-spambots and marked them GOOD, the process > could be speeded up with some kind of web of trust mechanism, such as > automatically retrieving the list of identities marked GOOD by each > identity you marked GOOD, and marking them OBSERVE. I'm not comfortable > about how much personal information is revealed by publishing a list of > the identities each identity trusts - it would make lurking difficult, > for example - but I suppose that has to be balanced against the need to > integrate new users as quickly as possible before their patience runs out.
I don't get it; can't someone already get that information (who you trust) by monitoring who you're replying to ? NextGen$
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
_______________________________________________ Devl mailing list Devl@freenetproject.org http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devl
