Luke771 schrieb: >>> Also, what about an option for ignoring the WoT's opinion until a newbie >>> has posted at least N messages, or M time has elapsed? >>> >> Sounds like a better idea than hash cash. >> >> > great idea > it would solve the problem in a simple elegant way, and without all the > hashcash problems > ...but I usually miss some very obvious point: what am I missing now? > > BTW, make it N messages only, no elapsed time: if an ID isnt sending any > messages, it surely isn't flooding anything > > also IMHO the no-WoT messages should be relatively many, like 75 or 100. > This would ensure that virtually 'everyone' has had a chance to see at > least one message from that ID (I'm thinking of an ID that sends lots of > messages to a board that has relatively few subscribers) >
The WoT is the basic trust calculation, why depend the option on Freetalk? If it really gets that central role that i hear, then it will not only be used for Freetalk, but also for filesharing, freesite publishing and more. Now if you only depend on the messages or the time, the user could do any bad thing via freesites or filesharing for an infinite abmount of time and would still be visible. So imho also no real option in the future. -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 315 bytes Desc: OpenPGP digital signature URL: <https://emu.freenetproject.org/pipermail/devl/attachments/20090511/d567ca73/attachment.pgp>
