Subject:
|
Re: Castle set rating curiosity
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.admin.database
|
Date:
|
Wed, 10 Jan 2001 01:42:53 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
119 times
|
| |
|
|
Duane Hess wrote:
> I hate to resurrect this thread, but I've also noted another trend which
> disturbs me. I have been adding my name to the sets which I own, which means
> that I have been cycling through quite a few listings in the set database. I
> have run across several themes where a note has been left saying "X-THEME
> SUCKS!" I am all for posting notes about a set that you own, positive or
> negative, that's how people become informed. However, what I don't like is
> having graffiti scrawled a theme. I view the statement quoted above as
> graffiti because the author
This is inherently a problem with any kind of open forum for
evaluations. It is an interesting problem. I feel that eventually, for
the web as a whole to be useful, there will have to be some kind of
system which allows anyone to rate and categorize anything on the web,
but that also has some algorithm for using data you would respect as the
input to searches. Such a system would have to rely on a web of trusted
relationships. For example, I would indicate that I trust Larry's
opinion very much when it comes to the topic of trains, and that because
of that trust, I also trust anyone he trusts for the topic of trains.
This would effectively create a web of mutually trusted train fans,
whose review and categorization data could be trusted. Then, when I did
a search, looking for information on slugs (as recently discussed in
.trains), I would indicate that the general area of interest is trains,
and the search engine would then give high weight to pages categorized
as train pages by the trusted web of train fans, on which the word
"slug" can be found. Such a search should then be 70% or better relevant
and not pick up tones of pages on the animal or pages which are using
"slug" as a derogatory term (though a few of each will show up in the
hit, the animal because someone will have a page on how to keep garden
slugs from ruining one's garden model railroad, a few from sites which
are really general garden pages, but got categorized as "train" by
someone because they had some cool pictures of garden railroads, and a
few of the derogatory use from pages which happen to use it, but wind up
with a trusted categorization as a train page, either because it really
is a train page with just a slightly uncouth author, or because someone
on the fringe of the web miscategorized a page). Note that such a search
engine will also take some time (probably a year or so) to become really
useful, because it will take some time for the various trust webs to get
built, and for the pages to get ratings. It would also help to have some
browser support (when you follow a link, the browser could give you an
interface to rate the categorization of the site based on your search
terms, add additional categorization information, and add the author to
your trust list for the trust category used in the search [with choices
to handle when you use two trust categories such as "train" AND
"LEGO"]). Eventually, as pages get enough categorization, the search
engines might be able to rely mostly on the added keywords rather than
the text of the web page. Another neat addition would be a way to also
use trusted "if you're interested in that, check this out also" or "if
you are looking for that, you should also use this word" (and example of
the first that I would create a relationship between would be "shay",
"heisler", and "climax" in the category trains, an example of the second
might be "sidewinder" and "shay" [you'll find a lot more hits for shays
by looking for that word than by looking for the nickname "sidewinder",
but someone not familiar with these types of locomotives might have head
the nickname but somehow couldn't remember the real name - hmm, found
some cool pages when I searched for "sidewinder" and "shay" on Altavista
- pardon me while I go browse them for a few minutes - unfortunately, it
looks like all the instances of "sidewinder" are links to the same page
which no longer exists :-(, said page having been the 2nd link Altavista
listed]).
Frank
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: Castle set rating curiosity
|
| (...) I hate to resurrect this thread, but I've also noted another trend which disturbs me. I have been adding my name to the sets which I own, which means that I have been cycling through quite a few listings in the set database. I have run across (...) (23 years ago, 9-Jan-01, to lugnet.admin.database)
|
16 Messages in This Thread:
 
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
Active threads in Database
|
|
|
|
|
|
