Re: META: Problems with collaborative filtering (was Re: Improving the list (was: Can we please

Anders Sandberg (
03 Mar 1999 15:01:13 +0100

"Bartley R. Troyan" <> writes:

> My point is, maybe both the Glorifieds and the Kooks should be given an
> automatic, periodic, proportional adjustment in the opposite direction of
> their current tendency, just to make sure nobody gets stuck in any holes.

I think it is a good idea to have a decay of the reputations. If I stop posting, my reputation will drop off towards zero.

reputation (t+1)= decay * reputation(t) + sum_i glorification_i(t)

where glorification_i(t) and kookification_i(t) are the amount of glorification/kookification user i gives at time t, and decay is the speed the reputation decays.

By the way, I don't think kookify is necessarily the best rating term. I would suggest glorify/denigrate or something else - being a good poster isn't the exact opposite to being a kook. Having a multidimensional reputation might be interesting, if more complex and less likely to work. For example one dimension would be quality, another relevance.

BTW, the true kooks will not be deterred by being kill-filed and kookified, they will just get another email address and post again (there are many examples on the net). Reputations are better as a positive way of keeping the list quality - we often do things to keep up our reputations.

Anders Sandberg                                      Towards Ascension!                  
GCS/M/S/O d++ -p+ c++++ !l u+ e++ m++ s+/+ n--- h+/* f+ g+ w++ t+ r+ !y