On 09/05/2005, at 4:04 PM, Robert Klemme wrote:
>>>
>>> When this was first published, I thought, wow this is cool.
>>> But, since then I have been reading a book called Freakonomics.
>>> And now, well, I wonder if this email provides an incentive
>>> (that did not previously exist) for those seeking public
>>> recognition, to post 'junk' so their name appears near the
>>> top of the stats.
>>
>> Yes, agreed.
>>
>>> Anyway, just wondering...
>>
>> I OTOH think optimistically, these stats will also provide us an
>> informations to locate and avoid such trolls.
>
> Hm, honestly, I don't think so. First, your stats come after the fact
> but more important, how do you tanslate quantity into a troll
> indicator? I'd say we need at least more sophisticated figures for
> that (text pattern analysis or whatever)... :-) Apart from that,
> usually you can detect them well by just looking at their articles.
Anyone care to give the new classifier a go at this? See if it can
evaluate the fitness of the threads for "useful content" or some other
classification system. I'll leave it to someone else's imagination as
to what constitutes fit. You could also then come up with a thread or
post rank/score which could be added up for each post the author makes.
This would mean that people with a good post score would be more likely
to be read than those with a low post score who would be ranked lower
in such a weighted stats systems.
J.