Christopher Maloney writes:
> I'm not clear on this. What algorithm do you use to determine a
> person's overall ranking as a function of the 1000 individual-
> specific rankings? If it's a simple sum, I would
Easy ;) No overall ranking is utilized (thought it sure would make some interesting raw data for analysis -- in interests of privacy protection only own evaluation profiles should be accessible).
This is just what it is: a personal server-side filter. It passes through (or blocks) posts from the other participant according to your private opinion about quality of their posts. Even better, we don't need a (latency-introducing) moderator since the ranking is done by subscribers.
> think that there might be some interesting failure modes, such
> as the list becoming dominated by a group who conspire to always
> vote positively for each other's posts. I don't know what the
This is one more reason (and a big problem in mutual citation communties in scientific publishing) to make filtering personal.
> likelihood of such a failure mode appearing at random would be
> (in the absence of an overt conspiracy).
> I think there's a whole science to this sort of thing, but it's
> not my game.