Am 22.09.2011 00:20, schrieb Robert Rohde: > On Wed, Sep 21, 2011 at 5:00 AM, David Gerard<[email protected]> wrote: >> The board resolution specifies a magical flying unicorn pony that >> shits rainbows. A wide-ranging survey has been conducted on the >> precise flight patterns and the importance of which way round the >> rainbow spectrum goes. These tiresome people who keep calling this >> "impossible" just do not understand that the high-level decision for a >> magical flying unicorn pony that shits rainbows has been set in stone. >> > I don't have any unicorns, but there are lots of ponies. I'd be happy > to stick a horn on one and call her sparkles if that would help? > > User rating / categorization systems are like ponies. They are a > familiar and commonplace way of organizing things. They can be used > to filter some things and reduce the degree of surprise; however they > will always have both a large false positive rate and a large false > negative rate. No filter is going to fly or shit rainbows. > > The question is not where to find mythical beasts, but whether > dressing up a horse so that it looks a little like a unicorn would > actually be useful. And that depends on whether there is actual > demand for such filters, and whether having a filter that is > sort-of-okay some of the time would be helpful to the people who want > filtering. > > -Robert Rohde The questions are. How many of the readers would actually: * want such a filter? * use such a filter? * see a need for a filter? * accept an biased filter that doesn't comply to their opinion? * think of it as a tool to protect their children?
Given the current data i have, this will be a very tiny group of users, but an huge amount of work, a new battlefield and tool for censors. _______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list [email protected] Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
