On Thu, May 7, 2009 at 2:02 PM, Thomas Sachau <mail at tommyserver.de> wrote: > Evan Daniel schrieb: >> I don't have any specific ideas for how to choose whether to ignore >> identities, but I think you're making the problem much harder than it >> needs to be. ?The problem is that you need to prevent spam, but at the >> same time prevent malicious non-spammers from censoring identities who >> aren't spammers. ?Fortunately, there is a well documented algorithm >> for doing this: the Advogato trust metric. >> >> The WoT documentation claims it is based upon the Advogato trust >> metric. ?(Brief discussion: http://www.advogato.org/trust-metric.html >> Full paper: http://www.levien.com/thesis/compact.pdf ) ?I think this >> is wonderful, as I think there is much to recommend the Advogato >> metric (and I pushed for it early on in the WoT discussions). >> However, my understanding of the paper and what is actually >> implemented is that the WoT code does not actually implement it. >> Before I go into detail, I should point out that I haven't read the >> WoT code and am not fully up to date on the documentation and >> discussions; if I'm way off base here, I apologize. > > I think, you are: > > The advogato idea may be nice (i did not read it myself), if you have exactly > 1 trustlist for > everything. But xor wants to implement 1 trustlist for every app as people > may act differently e.g. > on firesharing than on forums or while publishing freesites. You basicly dont > want to censor someone > just because he tries to disturb filesharing while he may be tries to bring > in good arguments at > forum discussions about it. > And i dont think that advogato will help here, right?
There are two questions here. The first question is given a set of identities and their trust lists, how do you compute the trust for an identity the user has not rated? The second question is, how do you determine what trust lists to use in which contexts? The two questions are basically orthogonal. I'm not certain about the contexts issue; Toad raised some good points, and while I don't fully agree with him, it's more complicated than I first thought. I may have more to say on that subject later. Within a context, however, the computation algorithm matters. The Advogato idea is very nice, and imho much better than the current WoT or FMS answers. You should really read their simple explanation page. It's really not that complicated; the only reasons I'm not fully explaining it here is that it's hard to do without diagrams, and they already do a good job of it. Evan Daniel
