------------------------------

Date: Fri, 7 Jan 1994 12:14:09 -0500 (EST)
From: sdw@MEADDATA.COM(Stephen Williams)
Subject: File 5--Re: File 7--Anarchy Gone Awry (Re: CuD 5.91) #2

> Response to <tokind@ACCA.NMSU.EDU>
>
> Thanks for a good, thoughtful article.
>
> It occurs to me that the ratings service you mention would need some
> kind of authentication.  I'm sure that even as I type this, there are
> people typing shrieks of "censorship"; some of these people are of the
> mentality that they would register their protest at any kind of rating
> system by reposting copies of "Cindy's Torment" in the kiddie groups,
> and forging a "G" rating.  (You Know Who You Are.)

It absolutely should have an OPTIONAL authentication.  Optional
because if I'm just using it to enhance message sorting, it's not a
big deal if it is forged.  I would want authentication in legal
liability avoidance situations.

> I'd love to have an "intelligent, or, at least, amusing content"
> rating.  Unfortunately, given net volume, this means a huge investment
> of people reading and rating the net, or advances in AI far beyond
> anything that seems likely to appear this century.  Especially since my
> standards of "intelligent and/or amusing" won't match anyone else's.

I guess I feel that people are already investing a huge amount of time
reading the net and that those that really keep up on a particular
group wouldn't mind pressing an extra key to approve/disapprove/type
an article.  Not all articles have to have a rating either.

My idea was that it would only be useful in certain groups.  Also,
since you can 'tune in' to certain reviewers you like (just like movie
reviewers), you can try to match your tastes with others.

It is even conceivable that you could 'choose' reviewers implicitly by
giving your own rating and having the system record who was in
agreement.  It would be an interesting instant/continous opinion poll
on topics.

> The signal-to-noise problem is the biggest one the net faces, as volume
> explodes with increasing access.  Few of us want to restrict access, of
> course.  As someone said, "I don't have a solution, but I sure admire
> the problem."


=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+
+                               END THIS FILE                                +
+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+===+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=