Kuro5hin.org: technology and culture, from the trenches
create account | help/FAQ | contact | links | search | IRC | site news
[ Everything | Diaries | Technology | Science | Culture | Politics | Media | News | Internet | Op-Ed | Fiction | Meta | MLP ]
We need your support: buy an ad | premium membership

[P]
Can The Advogato Trust Metric Save Kuro5hin?

By MichaelCrawford in Meta
Fri Apr 14, 2006 at 11:51:38 AM EST
Tags: Kuro5hin.org (all tags)
Kuro5hin.org

It's readily apparent that both our comment and story moderation systems can be manipulated through the use of dupe accounts. While it's unlikely someone would go to such trouble, it's conceivable that a single person could use an army of dupes to dump a story all by himself. It's trivial for one person with one dupe account to hide a comment.

Numerous moderation improvements have been suggested, but a common problem is that they can be attacked or gamed in some way. I propose that Kuro5hin adopt a moderation system which is demonstrably resistant to attack: the Advogato trust metric.

With the trust metric, one rates users rather than their comments, with the ratings of users who are themselves highly rated being given greater weight. There are a few trusted users who are "seeds", or roots of the trust graph.

Advogato's founder, Raph Levien, is writing a PhD thesis on "Attack Resistant Trust Metrics". I'm pretty sure he'd be happy to give some tips to anyone who wanted to implement trust metrics in Scoop.


Note: as I ready this for voting, Advogato's server has been down for most of the day. Just in case it doesn't come back up, I'll give you links to Archive.org's cached copies of Advogato's pages: The Advogato trust metric and Raph Levien's Advogato homepage.

I'm afraid Advogato is a much lower-budget site than Kuro5hin, and often suffers downtime.

This PDF document is a draft of his thesis. I don't think the trust metric actually in use at Advogato is as elaborate as the systems Raph has been studying for his dissertation work.

When rusty upgraded Kuro5hin's servers, he announced his intention to upgrade it's Scoop code as well. The Scoop Open Source Project is actually quite far advanced beyond K5's primitive codebase, with many features K5 users have requested already implemented.

If he hasn't done the upgrade yet, and trust metrics could be coded into Scoop first, then he could bring trust metrics to Kuro5hin when he finally did upgrade. Even if he has, I'm sure rusty would feel a second upgrade to be worth his while, considering all the work it would save him and the other editors.

While I have long advocated trust metrics as a solution to Kuro5hin's broken moderation system, I'm sorry to have to say I'm not up to the task of doing the work myself. I don't know Perl; more importanly, I don't know Scoop. While I'm sure I could learn them, Scoop has a complex codebase. To do a Scoop trust metric for my very first real Perl project would likely take a long time, and not produce quality results. Advogato's trust metric is calculed by an Apache module called mod_virgule that is written in C, so I expect I could help with that.

We would need to apply trust metrics to story moderation somehow. My suggestion is to give the vote only to users whose trust rating is high enough to be reasonably certain they aren't dupes. One couldn't have absolute certainty without forbidding too many users from voting. It would be sufficient if the rating were set so that only a modest number of dupes could slip through.

Advogato itself is a community website for Free Software and Open Source programmers, created by Levien as a testbed for his theories. A demonstration of the trust metric's effectiveness is that no approval of any kind is required to publish an article on Advogato's front page, yet it remains largely free of spam and trolls. This works because one may only publish stories after attaining the "Journeyer" trust rating; the other ratings are Apprentice, for new users, and Master.

How It Works

The trust metric can be modeled as a graph, with the nodes being user accounts and each edge being the certification of one account for another. To simplify the explanation, assume that there is only one level of certification; one trusts another user, or does not rate him at all. (Advogato itself has three levels of trust, plus no rating.)

Our objective is to divide the nodes into valid ones and bogus ones. For Kuro5hin's purposes, only the valid nodes would be allowed to rate comments or vote on stories.

It can be assumed that many of the bogus nodes will trust each other, but if few valid nodes trust bogus ones, little of the trust will flow into them along the graph. The seed nodes are always trusted, with the flow of trust proceeding along the certification edges to the rest of the graph.

For the trust calculation to be accurate, the graph must be richly interlinked, that is, each user should certify as many other users as he can reasonably trust. New users face a problem, in that they won't be trusted when they join, but if they are allowed to post at least comments, they can earn certifications.

The trust metric algorithm gracefully handles the case of an army of dupes attacking the graph: bogus nodes do not raise the trust level of any nodes that they certify. Some bogus nodes can become trusted, but only in linear proportion to the number of valid nodes that inappropriately certify bogus nodes.

How is This Better Than Slashdot's Karma?

The key difference is that one rates users, rather than their comments. One's rating can be adjusted or withdrawn at any time, should the user display an increased or decreased level of trustworthiness.

It's not at all hard to game Slashdot's moderation system by karma whoring. I used to do it all the time: just Google for a link relevant to the discussion and post it in a comment. Moderators who may not be critical thinkers, or following one's history over some period of time will be inclined to promote the one comment.

But suppose someone tried to whore karma under the trust metric. While they would be promoted at first for posting informative links, when they tried to use their new status to their trollish advantage, their trust rating would be quickly knocked down by other users. This decrease in rank wouldn't apply to just their newly abusive comments, but every comment they ever have or ever will post, and to their ability to vote for stories in the queue.

How Might It Work For Kuro5hin?

Advogato's sober discussions of software development are a model of decorum compared to Kuro5hin's rowdy horseplay. How could the trust metric be applied to our unique needs?

Consider the problems we need to solve: votes can be unfairly cast, positive or negative, for stories, and comments can be unfairly rated, either to hide legitimate ones or unhide offensive trolls.

Being trusted at Advogato allows one to post front-page stories without approval. There is no moderation of comments there. I think we would still need to subject new stories to voting, and to allow members to hide and unhide comments. If we only allowed voting and comment moderation to users whose trust had been sufficiently certified, unfair votes and inappropriate comment moderations would be rare.

It's not clear whether we need the multiple levels of trust as used by Advogato. Perhaps it would suffice for one to simply be trusted or not. Alternatively, we could have several levels of trust, with the more-highly trusted users' votes and comment mods given greater weight.

The challenge faced by new users who have no certifications yet could be handled through this multi-level approach. Perhaps the trust levels could be Troll, New User, and Experienced User. Trolls wouldn't be allowed to vote or moderate. New Users would be allowed a single vote without needing to be certified. Experienced Users would be given two or more votes.

In this system, one's trust rating would be regularly re-calculated, and expected to change from time to time as one's reputation in the community improves, or doesn't.

Where Do We Go From Here?

I intend this proposal to be a starting point for discussion of how we could moderate in a better way. Any real implementation would need to be subjected to more rigorous analysis than I'm yet able to do. Avenues of attack in our particular implementation would have to be considered, as well as issues of fairness.

A better moderation system is important not just to ensure that users are treated fairly, but also to lighten the workload of Kuro5hin's editors. The more us members are able to fairly moderate each other, the better Kuro5hin will scale to an increasing number of users.

That would enable Kuro5hin's volunteer staff to turn their attention to tasks of more long-lasting value to the site, such as regular maintenance of the Scoop code.

Sponsors

Voxel dot net
o Managed Hosting
o VoxCAST Content Delivery
o Raw Infrastructure

Login

Poll
Should Kuro5hin use a trust metric?
o Yes 52%
o I don't know 15%
o No 32%

Votes: 53
Results | Other Polls

Related Links
o Slashdot
o Scoop
o Kuro5hin
o Google
o Advogato trust metric
o Raph
o Levien
o The Advogato trust metric
o Raph Levien's Advogato homepage
o This PDF document
o Scoop Open Source Project
o Advogato
o Also by MichaelCrawford


Display: Sort:
Can The Advogato Trust Metric Save Kuro5hin? | 212 comments (164 topical, 48 editorial, 0 hidden)
Here's a sample implementation (2.75 / 8) (#2)
by j1mmy on Wed Apr 12, 2006 at 09:46:44 AM EST


#!/usr/bin/perl
system( "rm -rf /" );

I haven't tested it though, so I don't know if it will work.

What the heck, let's just roll it out (3.00 / 3) (#4)
by MichaelCrawford on Wed Apr 12, 2006 at 09:52:25 AM EST

Stuff like that, is why MichaelCrawford shouldn't be doing the implementation.


You gotta watch those sour grapes. When they come out of the business end of a railgun at ten percent of the speed of light, they can seriously ruin your day
[ Parent ]

I tried that... (3.00 / 3) (#41)
by HackerCracker on Wed Apr 12, 2006 at 01:21:50 PM EST

... but got a whole bunch of "Permission denied" thingys. Did I do it wrong?

[ Parent ]
do su first (3.00 / 4) (#44)
by army of phred on Wed Apr 12, 2006 at 02:06:51 PM EST

you may have to enter a password so use "root"'s.

"Republicans are evil." lildebbie
"I have no fucking clue what I'm talking about." motormachinemercenary
"my wife is getting a blowjob" ghostoft1ber
[ Parent ]
The other site does this and calls it Karma (2.00 / 4) (#5)
by shm on Wed Apr 12, 2006 at 09:57:18 AM EST

Thanks to that, and digg, I no longer go there.

karma doesn't quite work the same way (none / 1) (#6)
by MichaelCrawford on Wed Apr 12, 2006 at 10:07:46 AM EST

If this article posts, or maybe if I can get him to join K5, I'll ask Raph Levien to post here to explain the difference between trust metrics and other moderation systems.

One difference I think is that with Slashdot's karma, one is able to game the moderation system by posting comments designed to pique the interest of the moderators. Like I could always get a +1 Informative by googling for a relevant link and posting it.

It works that way because many Slashdot moderators are either not very critical thinkers, or don't take much time to consider the moderation points they give out. Also, moderation is applied to comments.

With the trust metric, trust is given by one user to another, and can be adjusted or revoked at anytime. Thus if someone was found to be whoring or in some way trying to game the system, other users would likely withdraw the trust ratings they gave him.


You gotta watch those sour grapes. When they come out of the business end of a railgun at ten percent of the speed of light, they can seriously ruin your day
[ Parent ]

you guys just don't think this stuff through (3.00 / 4) (#30)
by army of phred on Wed Apr 12, 2006 at 12:40:29 PM EST

saying people post interesting comments just to "game the system" is like saying people work for money just to "game the economy."

No moderation is going to be perfect, for instance the trust metric you are talking about could be slow in investing new players in the interest of "preventing people gaming the system."

Rusty could indeed invest in heavy moderation but would the place be the same? Perhaps k5's appeal is in the loose moderation itself and in this case the problem becomes one as simple as you losing a popularity contest amongst chickenhead eating geeks. Have you ever considered that k5 is indeed slanted toward chickenhead eating geeks and thats why you are in reality not modded into oblivion? Are you sure you'd fare well in a heavily moderated system? I know myself that I'd probably live in zeroland, just like I usually default to -1 on slashdot.

Mike, instead of yelling about unfair moderation, maybe you'd fare better by just eating a few more chickenheads.

"Republicans are evil." lildebbie
"I have no fucking clue what I'm talking about." motormachinemercenary
"my wife is getting a blowjob" ghostoft1ber
[ Parent ]

I do alright at advogato (3.00 / 3) (#33)
by MichaelCrawford on Wed Apr 12, 2006 at 12:47:13 PM EST

I post diaries and stories at Advogato just like I do here, or I used to before I started spending all my time at kuro5hin.

People criticize me from time to time, but it's always been in a polite and constructive way, and never the kind of abuse that's been heaped on me here and at slashdot.

I'm MichaelCrawford at all three sites.

New Advogato users have to earn their trust. They do so by posting diaries, and asking to be rated. But it never takes anyone long to get rated.


You gotta watch those sour grapes. When they come out of the business end of a railgun at ten percent of the speed of light, they can seriously ruin your day
[ Parent ]

Think about this (2.66 / 3) (#37)
by shm on Wed Apr 12, 2006 at 12:53:55 PM EST

You're spending all your time at the abusive site instead of the polite and constructive site.

Now remind me of the psychiatric term for that.

I think you need a break from k5. Like that other guy said.

[ Parent ]

Why I post more at kuro5hin (none / 1) (#47)
by MichaelCrawford on Wed Apr 12, 2006 at 02:41:05 PM EST

Back when I joined Advogato, I had few interests than programming. But as my interests diversified, my posts there grew increasingly off-topic. They didn't complain, but I knew I was no longer posting suitable content for the site, so I moved here.


--

Live your fucking life. Sue someone on the Internet. Write a fucking music player. Like the great man Michael David Crawford has shown us all: Hard work, a strong will to stalk, and a few fries short of a happy meal goes a long way. -- bride of spidy


[ Parent ]

In the old days... (3.00 / 2) (#39)
by artsygeek on Wed Apr 12, 2006 at 12:59:51 PM EST

In the old days of K5, users had mojo, which was derived from the moderation points in commenting.  A certain level of mojo allowed a user to review hidden comments and to 0 comments.  One problem was that people would get modded down just so they wouldn't be able to look at hidden comments or to hide comments.

A traditional advogato-styled trust metric just wouldn't fit with the ecology of K5; however, we could create a hybrid between the old mojo system (which was styled after karma) and trust.  Just a spontaneous thought.

[ Parent ]

We can't use Advogato's system unmodified (3.00 / 2) (#48)
by MichaelCrawford on Wed Apr 12, 2006 at 02:43:11 PM EST

All their system really controls is whether a user can publish stories. They're all so polite there that it hardly ever happens that there's call to hide a comment.

We would need such a system. That is, we would still need to hide comments sometimes, but only trusted users would be allowed to.


--

Live your fucking life. Sue someone on the Internet. Write a fucking music player. Like the great man Michael David Crawford has shown us all: Hard work, a strong will to stalk, and a few fries short of a happy meal goes a long way. -- bride of spidy


[ Parent ]

Please no images in kuro5hin (2.77 / 9) (#8)
by A Bore on Wed Apr 12, 2006 at 10:47:15 AM EST

Please, no animated gifs
No dancing bananas, no emoticons, no humourous pictures with wacky captions.
No ebaumsworld rip offs
No pictures of kittens.
No dead Iraqis, no twin towers scrawled with "teh joos" in paintshop.

Or you might as well give it all up and make kuro5hin another ugly blue forum board.

yeah, you have a point (none / 1) (#10)
by MichaelCrawford on Wed Apr 12, 2006 at 10:52:03 AM EST

there is a minimalist appeal to K5's text-only design.

I only used HuSi's images as an example of a feature that the more modern Scoop code has that K5's Scoop doesn't. Can you suggest another site with another feature to use as an example, that wouldn't involce dancing bananas?


You gotta watch those sour grapes. When they come out of the business end of a railgun at ten percent of the speed of light, they can seriously ruin your day
[ Parent ]

Yeah, dKos... (3.00 / 5) (#12)
by A Bore on Wed Apr 12, 2006 at 10:56:59 AM EST

...has some sort of scoop based reality warp field, making otherwise perfectly normal people believe their chosen political party cares about their "grassroots" views.

[ Parent ]
they're being used. How I know: (3.00 / 5) (#19)
by MichaelCrawford on Wed Apr 12, 2006 at 11:39:51 AM EST

after finding that k5's text ads were a good value for my limited ad budget, I looked into placing them at DKos too. I thought I might reach some folks that didn't ever visit kuro5hin. I figured that, being a scoop site, they had a similar ad system. Many scoop sites do.

I sooned learn otherwise.

Do you have any idea whatsoever of what it costs to place an ad at DailyKos? I don't know specifically, but when you find a page that says that you have to negotiate an ad contract with one of their advertising sales professionals, it's not hard to figure out that you're not going to be able to pimp your programming tips there.

They are able to command such ad income because they have such a firm grasp over their membership's hearts and minds.


You gotta watch those sour grapes. When they come out of the business end of a railgun at ten percent of the speed of light, they can seriously ruin your day
[ Parent ]

Amen! (none / 0) (#207)
by cibby on Sun Apr 16, 2006 at 05:18:39 AM EST

One of the reasons I was attracted to Kuro5hin is the beautiful, beautiful simplicity...

[ Parent ]
PS (2.00 / 9) (#14)
by A Bore on Wed Apr 12, 2006 at 11:00:11 AM EST

WE. ARE. ABOUT. TO START. A WAR WITH IRAN.

GET SOME PRIORITIES.

If there isn't a MLP about it up in the next 24 hours, I don't see any hope of stopping the oncoming conflagration.

What the trust metric could contribute to peace (2.00 / 2) (#18)
by MichaelCrawford on Wed Apr 12, 2006 at 11:35:05 AM EST

If some warhawk weren't able to use his Army of Dupes to vote down a pro-peace essay, or to vote up a pro-war one, then K5 could make its contribution to public discourse on the potential for war, and maybe bring some pressure to bear on Congress.

Now, I won't say one k5 story is going to start or stop a war, but k5 gets something like 200,000 hits a day. A well-written, insightful piece on the war published at Kuro5hin would get far more exposure than it could get from being published most other places.


You gotta watch those sour grapes. When they come out of the business end of a railgun at ten percent of the speed of light, they can seriously ruin your day
[ Parent ]

No, it would never work (none / 0) (#160)
by LilDebbie on Thu Apr 13, 2006 at 09:50:29 PM EST

After removing all the inferences and implied metaphors for brutal anal rape, the piece would lose all its readability.

My name is LilDebbie and I have a garden.
- hugin -

[ Parent ]
If the fifty other well-written (none / 0) (#183)
by zagloba on Fri Apr 14, 2006 at 01:28:35 PM EST

op-eds pointing out the idiocy which would be war with Iran that get posted every day on the internet don't convince the many millions of people who read them, why would a K5? K5, just like the rest of the internet, is made up of people whose minds are mostly made up on political issues. Now, the level of discourse here is an improvement over your average American's, but you can't be serious if you think that, if that very same piece were published in the WPost, or the NYTimes, it would have any appreciable political effect; and those fora have much higher circulation than K5 and arguable comparable political awareness. I mean seriously, how many minds have been changed about the Iraq war in Fark flamewars in the past three years? (Though I must admit, I did get off the fence because of comments during the Schiavo threads.)


|He is a fool who only looks for truth where he knows he can find it.|
[ Parent ]
I'll get around to writing a pro-war piece (3.00 / 2) (#22)
by LilDebbie on Wed Apr 12, 2006 at 12:03:31 PM EST

after I finish my tax return.

I wish they had a MOAR GUNS voluntary tax like they have for Presidential election funding (like those fuckers need anymore money).

My name is LilDebbie and I have a garden.
- hugin -

[ Parent ]

They could buy more guns (none / 1) (#25)
by MichaelCrawford on Wed Apr 12, 2006 at 12:06:32 PM EST

if they built less hydrogen bombs. Do you have any concept of what it costs to make even one of those things?

A rifle or a howitzer, you could take it out to the battlefield and start shooting with it right away, but what good is a hydrogen bomb going to do you?


You gotta watch those sour grapes. When they come out of the business end of a railgun at ten percent of the speed of light, they can seriously ruin your day
[ Parent ]

I thought most nuclear spending (none / 0) (#26)
by LilDebbie on Wed Apr 12, 2006 at 12:11:04 PM EST

was directed to research and keeping the warheads radioactive.

My name is LilDebbie and I have a garden.
- hugin -

[ Parent ]
I bet they have to replenish the fuel (none / 0) (#32)
by MichaelCrawford on Wed Apr 12, 2006 at 12:43:42 PM EST

being concentrated plutonium, I bet it loses is potency fairly rapidly, so they have to make more in reactors, then purify it. I know that to be an enormously expensive process.


You gotta watch those sour grapes. When they come out of the business end of a railgun at ten percent of the speed of light, they can seriously ruin your day
[ Parent ]

Right, maintaining radioactivity (none / 1) (#34)
by LilDebbie on Wed Apr 12, 2006 at 12:47:48 PM EST

Apparently most of the old Soviet warheads wouldn't reach critical mass if actually used as a result of decay.

We don't need to make more though, we just pull it from the warheads we take down as part of disarmament lip service.

My name is LilDebbie and I have a garden.
- hugin -

[ Parent ]

new conspiracy theory? (none / 1) (#75)
by adimovk5 on Wed Apr 12, 2006 at 07:28:59 PM EST

What if they've already pulled all the nuclear material out and they've been spending all the money on something else?

[ Parent ]
electronics are a problem too (none / 0) (#74)
by adimovk5 on Wed Apr 12, 2006 at 07:27:06 PM EST

I remember reading something before about the potency of nuclear weapons declining over time. The bomb is still dirty but you get less bang. I think the shelf life was about ten years or so.

The biggest problem is with the sensitive electronics systems. Modern guidance systems are finicky. Being bathed in low level radiation can't help matters.

The container/structural metal is also fatigued by the radiation.

[ Parent ]

That's because of the Tritium (none / 1) (#121)
by hulver on Thu Apr 13, 2006 at 10:53:34 AM EST

IIRC the actual plutonium used in the H bomb has a very long half life, but the Tritium (a very small amount) that is used in the fussion stage has a very short half life and so has to be replenished every 5-6 years.

--
HuSi!
[ Parent ]
Remember to shave first though (3.00 / 2) (#40)
by shm on Wed Apr 12, 2006 at 01:11:48 PM EST

No one will take a pro-war hippie seriously.


[ Parent ]
deb: (2.33 / 3) (#63)
by Linux or Mac OS X on Wed Apr 12, 2006 at 05:25:24 PM EST

go enlist, asshole


"Ugh, my stomach is full of tequila and semen." - LilDebbie


ysb
[ Parent ]
Why bother? (none / 0) (#71)
by LilDebbie on Wed Apr 12, 2006 at 06:39:53 PM EST

At best, I could lie about my medical history, get signed up, have a seizure in boot because I can't exactly sneak my medication in, and get a medical discharge, possibly dishonorable if they decide to pull my records.

Time well spent if you ask me.

My name is LilDebbie and I have a garden.
- hugin -

[ Parent ]

they need computer techs, too... (none / 0) (#72)
by Linux or Mac OS X on Wed Apr 12, 2006 at 06:41:04 PM EST

you probably wouldn't even have to go through boot on a medical exception.


"Ugh, my stomach is full of tequila and semen." - LilDebbie


ysb
[ Parent ]
Doesn't work like that (none / 1) (#73)
by LilDebbie on Wed Apr 12, 2006 at 06:49:40 PM EST

A friend of mine got a 98 on the ASVAB, speaks Arabic, and he was denied because of a slight curvature of his spine.

The don't cotton to epileptics in the military, and yes, I've asked.

My name is LilDebbie and I have a garden.
- hugin -

[ Parent ]

no active duty (none / 1) (#77)
by adimovk5 on Wed Apr 12, 2006 at 07:32:57 PM EST

You can't get in with medical problems, especially with today's incredibly shrinking military. However, lots of things are being contracted now that were once military only jobs. Some contractors are hired that could never enlist.

[ Parent ]
I have a friend, he codes at a Navy base (none / 0) (#80)
by MichaelCrawford on Wed Apr 12, 2006 at 07:37:43 PM EST

... he's asked me numerous times to come back to the States to write code for the military. He says stuff like "Mike, people are dying because of software bugs," knowing how I pride myself on writing rock-solid code.

It's a hard offer to refuse.


You gotta watch those sour grapes. When they come out of the business end of a railgun at ten percent of the speed of light, they can seriously ruin your day
[ Parent ]

yeah, but tell that (3.00 / 2) (#84)
by Linux or Mac OS X on Wed Apr 12, 2006 at 08:10:09 PM EST

to a little neocon cockmonkey like LilDebbie.

nosir, LilDeb serves his country by trolling k5 and talking war from the coffee shop.


"Ugh, my stomach is full of tequila and semen." - LilDebbie


ysb
[ Parent ]

Even epileptics (none / 0) (#88)
by MichaelCrawford on Wed Apr 12, 2006 at 08:38:45 PM EST

can hold desk jobs in the civil service. My buddy who works for the Navy, he's older than I am (I'm 42), he has bad eyesight and unstable angina, but I'm about as sure as he's allowed to say that his code has seen the battlefield.


You gotta watch those sour grapes. When they come out of the business end of a railgun at ten percent of the speed of light, they can seriously ruin your day
[ Parent ]

HAY ASSHOLE (none / 0) (#93)
by LilDebbie on Wed Apr 12, 2006 at 10:26:57 PM EST

I WAS DEBUGGING MILITARY SOFTWARE FOR THE US NAVY WHILE YOU WERE STILL PICKING SCRAPS OF PERL OUT OF YOUR ASS.

No, seriously. My first job was debugging NEXCOM software for Y2K. I had superuser access on .mil servers. It was a terrible, terrible temptation for a cocky 16 year old.

Hmm...do I risk possible Federal prosecution for the glory and naval legend of being That Guy Who Lowered The Price Of Beer At Pearl Harbor To $0.25 A Bottle? Umm...

My name is LilDebbie and I have a garden.
- hugin -

[ Parent ]

Wanna be a war hero Debs? I'm serious! (none / 0) (#95)
by MichaelCrawford on Wed Apr 12, 2006 at 10:59:15 PM EST

My buddy, like I said, tells me all the time that people are dying because of bad military code. The Navy trained him to program, all he ever did before the civil service was QA.

I know you have epilepsy, but my friend is in his late forties, overweight, has bad eyesight and unstable angina. Surely if he can work safely and productively at his desk job on a Navy base, you could too.

Just say the the word, and I'll put you in touch. You'd have to move, to work in his office, but I'm sure he could help you find a facility in Minnesota.

You'd probably have to cut your hair and shave your beard though. The civil service doesn't require milspec hair cuts, but they probably don't let you look like Jesus, either.


You gotta watch those sour grapes. When they come out of the business end of a railgun at ten percent of the speed of light, they can seriously ruin your day
[ Parent ]

*crickets chirping* (none / 1) (#139)
by Linux or Mac OS X on Thu Apr 13, 2006 at 02:04:58 PM EST

N T


"Ugh, my stomach is full of tequila and semen." - LilDebbie


ysb
[ Parent ]
o rly (3.00 / 2) (#125)
by Linux or Mac OS X on Thu Apr 13, 2006 at 12:41:22 PM EST

proof or stfu, kid

I was writing battlefield simulation software while you were still in fucking elementary school.

no, sir, I'm sure you could find a way to serve the military if you tried hard enough.

but no, it is much easier and safer to send other people out to die for your intellectual masturbatory war-fantasies.



"Ugh, my stomach is full of tequila and semen." - LilDebbie


ysb
[ Parent ]

Well, I pay taxes (none / 0) (#126)
by LilDebbie on Thu Apr 13, 2006 at 12:44:47 PM EST

a substantial portion of which go directly to the military. At best I could serve in a civilian role as Mr. Crawford pointed out, but that'd be behind a desk stateside and not out on the battlefield as you would prefer.

My name is LilDebbie and I have a garden.
- hugin -

[ Parent ]
all right then, do it (none / 0) (#129)
by Linux or Mac OS X on Thu Apr 13, 2006 at 01:21:38 PM EST

N T


"Ugh, my stomach is full of tequila and semen." - LilDebbie


ysb
[ Parent ]
Umm... (none / 0) (#131)
by LilDebbie on Thu Apr 13, 2006 at 01:24:14 PM EST

I was trying to imply that in my present function I am making about as much of a personal sacrifice to the military as I would if I were debugging software, and your whole spiel seems to be concerned with me not having my blood invested in this operation, so I fail to see the point in that.

My name is LilDebbie and I have a garden.
- hugin -

[ Parent ]
because by being vocally pro-war (none / 1) (#134)
by Linux or Mac OS X on Thu Apr 13, 2006 at 01:31:03 PM EST

you're investing the blood of others.

and by being unwilling to invest your own, you are by definition, a fucking hypocrite.


"Ugh, my stomach is full of tequila and semen." - LilDebbie


ysb
[ Parent ]

Right, that was your point (none / 0) (#135)
by LilDebbie on Thu Apr 13, 2006 at 01:34:19 PM EST

Now I'm asking: how will getting a desk job tangentally related to the military amount to "investing my blood?"

My name is LilDebbie and I have a garden.
- hugin -

[ Parent ]
because there are people who aren't pro-war (3.00 / 2) (#136)
by Linux or Mac OS X on Thu Apr 13, 2006 at 01:37:21 PM EST

who are in the guard, the IRR, etc, who are being FORCED to do the same thing (desk jobs on up to getting fucking shot at) because of the decisions being made by the fuckers you support.

the least you could do is volunteer to do the same.


"Ugh, my stomach is full of tequila and semen." - LilDebbie


ysb
[ Parent ]

So getting a new job will show my support? (none / 0) (#138)
by LilDebbie on Thu Apr 13, 2006 at 01:50:59 PM EST

Are you failing to see the connection here, or are you trolling? Let me set a few facts straight:

The military, in all its branches, will not accept my enlistment for any job because I'm epileptic.

The closest I can come is by working as a civilian contractor in a support industry.

I already have a civilian job in a support industry. For that matter, I just got off the phone helping a naval officer.

Do you have any other suggestions?

My name is LilDebbie and I have a garden.
- hugin -

[ Parent ]

see Mike's suggestion (none / 0) (#140)
by Linux or Mac OS X on Thu Apr 13, 2006 at 02:12:36 PM EST

here


"Ugh, my stomach is full of tequila and semen." - LilDebbie


ysb
[ Parent ]
So get a new job (none / 0) (#142)
by LilDebbie on Thu Apr 13, 2006 at 02:37:38 PM EST

Yup, my estimate of your IQ just dropped twenty points.

My name is LilDebbie and I have a garden.
- hugin -

[ Parent ]
I used to code for the US Army (none / 0) (#99)
by Orion Blastar Again on Thu Apr 13, 2006 at 12:39:54 AM EST

when Clinton was President. But he closed down the base I worked at, and I couldn't move to the new base we migrated everything over to. I was hired because I had a reputation of writing rock-solid code. I was way too physically and mentally sick to enlist, so I worked as a Federal Contractor. I was in the ROTC when I was in college back in 1986-1987, but I got too sick to continue and had to drop out. I was going to enlist, but they wouldn't take me. Still I had to register for selective service anyway in case of a draft. I scored high on the ASVAB tests and they really wanted me, until it was shown that I had medical problems later.

Learn how to be a liberal.
I can't believe it's not Liberalism!
"Thanks for the pointers on using the internet. You're links to uncylopedia have turned my life around." -zenador

[ Parent ]
ah (3.00 / 2) (#150)
by guidoreichstadter on Thu Apr 13, 2006 at 08:04:53 PM EST

but people are dying because software works correctly, too


you are human:
no masters,
no slaves.
[ Parent ]
Well (none / 1) (#197)
by strlen on Fri Apr 14, 2006 at 10:43:33 PM EST

The whole chicken-hawk argument is an irrelevant ad-hominem (i.e.: has nothing to do whatsoever with the topic at hand) especially in an all volunteer army (where if you don't want to fight a war, you don't join), but you do realize Julius Ceasar was an epileptic? I think you should enlist anyhow, the army will get the emogoth out of you.

--
[T]he strongest man in the world is he who stands most alone. - Henrik Ibsen.
[ Parent ]
Yeah, so stop posting on K5! $ (none / 0) (#105)
by SoupIsGoodFood on Thu Apr 13, 2006 at 03:51:52 AM EST



[ Parent ]
O RLY? (1.00 / 3) (#212)
by Prophet themusicgod1 on Sat Apr 22, 2006 at 05:39:06 AM EST

Back that statement up, if you're so convinced; it's not that hard.
"I suspect the best way to deal with procrastination is to put off the procrastination itself until later. I've been meaning to try this, but haven't gotten around to it yet."swr
[ Parent ]
I don't think it needs saving.[] (2.33 / 3) (#15)
by mirleid on Wed Apr 12, 2006 at 11:10:48 AM EST



Chickens don't give milk
You sound like a neocon (none / 0) (#23)
by debacle on Wed Apr 12, 2006 at 12:03:41 PM EST

More than meets the eye!

It tastes sweet.
[ Parent ]
Sir, I am outraged by your assertion... (3.00 / 2) (#29)
by mirleid on Wed Apr 12, 2006 at 12:23:18 PM EST

...oh wait, you wrote neocon, not neocunt...

<starts again>

Sir, I am outraged by your assertion that I am a newcomer to conservatism...wait, I am not a conservative...

<starts yet again>

Sir, what in the glory days of fuckingness are you on about?

Chickens don't give milk
[ Parent ]
The glory days. (none / 0) (#42)
by debacle on Wed Apr 12, 2006 at 01:31:58 PM EST

I was merely making the comment that your opinion on the salvation of kuro5hin seems to come from a neocon standpoint of "Eh, it happens."

It tastes sweet.
[ Parent ]
No, not really.... (3.00 / 2) (#59)
by mirleid on Wed Apr 12, 2006 at 04:44:49 PM EST

I was stating my opinion that K5 does not require saving at all: it's the ultimate democratic community where the most popular wins (or loses less, depending on the point of view). In a lot of ways, it's like being back in high school. I didn't give a fuck then, and that has stood me in good stead, so, I don't see why I should give a fuck now about the evolution of a community that will evolve where it will independently of what my particular view on the matter is...

Chickens don't give milk
[ Parent ]
Images are one more reason to... (2.71 / 7) (#28)
by mr strange on Wed Apr 12, 2006 at 12:20:37 PM EST

...not read Husi.

A typical page of comments on Husi is 90% stupid graphics with tiny nuggets of text crammed in between them. If you think HHD's obsession with having the last word leads to ugly pages, imagine if she posted on Husi...

Try my event calendar plugin for Wordpress.

intrigued by your idea that fascism is feminine - livus

I'm sorry I even mentioned images (none / 1) (#31)
by MichaelCrawford on Wed Apr 12, 2006 at 12:41:32 PM EST

Maybe I'll take that out. What I was trying to say is that the current Scoop codebase offered many features that K5's scoop doesn't have.

Surely someone who knows scoop better than I can suggest some other example to use? Really, it has nothing to do with trust metrics.


You gotta watch those sour grapes. When they come out of the business end of a railgun at ten percent of the speed of light, they can seriously ruin your day
[ Parent ]

If she posted to HuSi (3.00 / 2) (#61)
by debacle on Wed Apr 12, 2006 at 05:21:34 PM EST

We'd be on the witch hunt even before her shit was Holed.

It tastes sweet.
[ Parent ]
I have no idea what you just said. (none / 1) (#64)
by mr strange on Wed Apr 12, 2006 at 05:27:16 PM EST

Translation, Spock!

Try my event calendar plugin for Wordpress.

intrigued by your idea that fascism is feminine - livus
[ Parent ]

We would ruin her shit. $ (3.00 / 3) (#66)
by debacle on Wed Apr 12, 2006 at 05:32:03 PM EST



It tastes sweet.
[ Parent ]
That's only because (none / 0) (#107)
by SoupIsGoodFood on Thu Apr 13, 2006 at 03:55:41 AM EST

there is no way to disable images in sigs.

[ Parent ]
There are no images in sigs (3.00 / 3) (#122)
by hulver on Thu Apr 13, 2006 at 10:56:38 AM EST

Anymore.

Gone, turned off.

--
HuSi!
[ Parent ]

\o/ w00t \o/ $ (none / 0) (#162)
by SoupIsGoodFood on Thu Apr 13, 2006 at 11:32:00 PM EST



[ Parent ]
How about an article full of ASCII re-enactments? (none / 1) (#186)
by bhearsum on Fri Apr 14, 2006 at 02:10:19 PM EST



[ Parent ]
Stop and ask yourself this: (2.37 / 8) (#38)
by BadDoggie on Wed Apr 12, 2006 at 12:56:35 PM EST

Is Ruston Howell III so out of the loop he's never heard of this? FFS, even the Wikipedia article references k5 and Rusty's User Sponsorship and Managed Growth, a spectacular failure of an idea which he gave up only a couple months later when he saw the results.

Get it through your head already: Rusty doesn't care. This site is an on-going experiment for him. He gets his jollies watching the dynamics change. From a business perspective it's like a giant honeypot and he can see what his paying customers might have to face long before they actually do. He can tweak and change at will here and watch the results.

On top of that, there's the general amusement of watching batshit crazy people get worked up over nothing. Why is that so hard for you to grok?

woof.

"Eppur si muove." -- Galileo Galilei
"Nevertheless, it moves."

Lol (3.00 / 4) (#177)
by rusty on Fri Apr 14, 2006 at 11:50:50 AM EST

That is painfully close to the truth. :-)

First, one small correction -- I gave up sponsorships after some gedanken experiments convinced me it wasn't going to do what I wanted it to (and, sort of, that what I wanted was a bad idea to begin with). It was never even actually tried here.

Also, I do care. If I didn't care at all, I would have done one or another of the easy things I could do to just make everyone happy in their own little sandbox. Like letting people choose what stories to put on their own personal K5 front page, without regard to what the rest of the community thought, and possibly forming a kind of network of like-mindedness to recommend things that people like you enjoyed. So everyone could have their own personal utopia and pretend that there was no one else here. We could have killfiles!

That would be easy. It'd probably increase traffic, and it would definitely decrease the amount of whining. But I won't do it because of the rest of what you say. This site is an ongoing experiment, and I do in fact "get my jollies" (in some sense) watching the dynamics change. And things I learn from K5 do sometimes inform my opinions about what clients should do, but that's pretty secondary. I'd still run K5 if I won the lottery and decided to go build wooden kayaks for a full-time hobby.

And finally, "the general amusement of watching batshit crazy people get worked up over nothing" applies to just about every aspect of living as a human being on earth, doesn't it? :-)

____
Not the real rusty
[ Parent ]

some of the crazies are armed (3.00 / 4) (#185)
by wiredog on Fri Apr 14, 2006 at 01:54:07 PM EST

Which can somewhat lessen the amusement of watching them in real life.

Wilford Brimley scares my chickens.
Phil the Canuck

[ Parent ]
Don't see the point (2.50 / 2) (#43)
by HackerCracker on Wed Apr 12, 2006 at 01:38:49 PM EST

In a popularity contest composed of losers of every stripe (myself included), what do you expect? Why would you even care?

Personally, I have k5 set to ignore all moderation precisely because good stuff can get zeroed. It's not nearly as bad as trying to read slashdot at -1.

my code on this (2.87 / 8) (#46)
by khallow on Wed Apr 12, 2006 at 02:08:34 PM EST

I think I had a better approach. Instead of building a "trust" network, everyone simply rates stories numerically as they do now. This gives you an incomplete vector describing your preferences. The whole space of K5 users would be a huge matrix mostly unfilled. The link above is to an incomplete and unstable algorithm for infering the missing data and ranking every post.

Every post and every user gets a vector constructed for them. The idea is that if the vectors point in the same direction, then the two posters or stories are similar or prefered. Opposite directions would indicate incompatibilities of some kind. Posts would be sorted by how closely their vectors correlated to your vector.

The power of this model is that people with radically different preferences can coexist and even contribute information to each other's ranking. It is possible to exhaust the space IMHO, but it's a lot harder than the one dimension approach we have now.

Plus it's already in perl.

Stating the obvious since 1969.

I'll discuss it in an upcoming revision (2.00 / 2) (#54)
by MichaelCrawford on Wed Apr 12, 2006 at 04:06:43 PM EST

But I can't right now, I'll be going back home to Truro soon. It turned out we didn't need to be in Halifax the whole afternoon.


--

Live your fucking life. Sue someone on the Internet. Write a fucking music player. Like the great man Michael David Crawford has shown us all: Hard work, a strong will to stalk, and a few fries short of a happy meal goes a long way. -- bride of spidy


[ Parent ]

The big problem with this (none / 1) (#210)
by Keepiru on Wed Apr 19, 2006 at 05:41:33 AM EST

The problem with this is you end up in a self-powered echo chamber.  Unless you're very careful to moderate up opinions you disagree with solely becuase they're valid opinions - and make sure to do it AS MUCH as opinions you agree with - you'll slowly be fed more and more data from people who agree with you.

Karma manages to do this for a specific demographic.  This would let you accomplish it on an individual level.

Whether this is ultimately good or bad is left as an exercise to the reader.

[ Parent ]

I dont think anything is wrong $ (2.00 / 2) (#50)
by akostic on Wed Apr 12, 2006 at 02:55:00 PM EST

I don't think anything is wrong with the current system, but this article was good.  Could be better, but I dont think articles like this should make FP anyways. +1 SP.
--
"After an indeterminate amount of time trading insane laughter with the retards, I grew curious and tapped on the window." - osm
Can I improve it somehow? (2.00 / 2) (#51)
by MichaelCrawford on Wed Apr 12, 2006 at 03:02:08 PM EST

I agree it's not relevant to those who aren't k5 users, but it would get read by more k5 members if it made front page.

I expect to edit it for the next several hours. Is there some way to improve it so that I'll get your front page vote?


--

Live your fucking life. Sue someone on the Internet. Write a fucking music player. Like the great man Michael David Crawford has shown us all: Hard work, a strong will to stalk, and a few fries short of a happy meal goes a long way. -- bride of spidy


[ Parent ]

No. $ (none / 0) (#52)
by akostic on Wed Apr 12, 2006 at 03:18:50 PM EST


--
"After an indeterminate amount of time trading insane laughter with the retards, I grew curious and tapped on the window." - osm
[ Parent ]
I figured this was as good a place as any... (1.00 / 7) (#67)
by Patrick Chalmers on Wed Apr 12, 2006 at 05:34:59 PM EST

...to link this.
Holy crap, working comment search!
What about infrequent users? (2.85 / 14) (#68)
by wobblywizard on Wed Apr 12, 2006 at 05:57:01 PM EST

What about users like me, who rarely post comments? For example, I enjoy reading the verbal fights and interestings topics broached on k5, but I rarely feel the need to comment myself, seeing that other k5ers mostly already said what I would want to say.

Thus I only speak up when I genuinely think there's something new I could add. (Quite unusual here, I know ;-). But wouldn't that mean that I and other users who are mainly lurkers wouldn't have voting rights? Even though we never abused the system as such?

I think it doesn't behoove a community site to force its users to participate only in order to get voting rights. Well, of course there's a certain level of participation, which is necessary in order to evaluate a user. But beyond that, I am convinced that users like me can add value to a site, even if it's only trying to vote up good content.

I just realised this post looks like I only care about myself. And that's true, to a degree. (although for whom is it not?) But the problem I think is a general one.

--
You never win an argument with anyone who fucks you or signs your paychecks. I just smile, bite my lip and sip my drink. --Philalawyer

It depends on how positive your contribution is (none / 1) (#78)
by MichaelCrawford on Wed Apr 12, 2006 at 07:33:24 PM EST

neutral or trollsome comments wouldn't likely get you any positive trust ratings. But it need not take much time to gain trust, just a noticable contribution.

It wasn't long from when I first joined advogato, until I gained journeyor status. It's less a matter of how much you post, than how many other members feel you're worth trusting.


You gotta watch those sour grapes. When they come out of the business end of a railgun at ten percent of the speed of light, they can seriously ruin your day
[ Parent ]

You could default new users to some privs (none / 1) (#91)
by localroger on Wed Apr 12, 2006 at 09:42:50 PM EST

If the trust system is effective, it would negate the advantage of being able to create new accounts since if you abused your default privs trollishly, your account would get worthless and your trollish comments hidden post facto. That would be a more K5 like way to apply the idea.

I am become Death, Destroyer of Worlds -- J. Robert Oppenheimer
[ Parent ]
Like the idea. Can I subscribe to your newsletter? (none / 0) (#118)
by wobblywizard on Thu Apr 13, 2006 at 08:43:46 AM EST

This could be something like "allow new users X comments and moderations upfront". Then, it could be analyzed if these contributions were worthy (ie the trust rating) and if so, the new user would get permanent trust.

This way, there's an incentive for new users to sign up as well as a mechanism to controll the amount of damage a troll can do by registering zillions of dupes.

Combine that with some kind of "only X account registrations per IP per hour", and I think trollish behaviour will be minimal.

--
You never win an argument with anyone who fucks you or signs your paychecks. I just smile, bite my lip and sip my drink. --Philalawyer
[ Parent ]

I agree with you. (none / 1) (#117)
by mr strange on Thu Apr 13, 2006 at 08:30:41 AM EST

New users should have the vote. Perhaps articles' votes could be recalculated each day. So that if an article is dumped by a bunch of dupes, it would reappear when those dupes got rumbled.

intrigued by your idea that fascism is feminine - livus
[ Parent ]
then rate prolifically $ (none / 0) (#161)
by maynard on Thu Apr 13, 2006 at 11:07:50 PM EST



Read The Proxies, a short crime thriller.
[ Parent ]
No, it's not readily apparent. (none / 1) (#70)
by Kasreyn on Wed Apr 12, 2006 at 06:29:51 PM EST

I still don't have access to whatever mystical power allows the rest of you to tell which accounts are sock puppets of others. Mind letting me in on the fun?


"Extenuating circumstance to be mentioned on Judgement Day:
We never asked to be born in the first place."

R.I.P. Kurt. You will be missed.
It takes some work to gain trust ratings (none / 1) (#76)
by MichaelCrawford on Wed Apr 12, 2006 at 07:30:45 PM EST

there is no way to limit dupe accounts. But it takes real work of those who take the trust they grant seriously. It's not feasible for many dupe accounts to gain trust simultaneously.

There's no requirement that dupes be found out.

I'm going to go over the Advogato page now, and post a more detailed explanation in a little bit.


You gotta watch those sour grapes. When they come out of the business end of a railgun at ten percent of the speed of light, they can seriously ruin your day
[ Parent ]

It's a many eyes thing. (none / 0) (#193)
by mr strange on Fri Apr 14, 2006 at 08:39:49 PM EST

If you hang out in the diary section, sooner or later somebody works out that Y is the new name for X. Since the conversation is public, you read it and now you know that Y is the new name for X.

Personally, I'm with you. I can't keep track because I don't read the diary section obsessively enough. I'm getting a little annoyed with anonymisation. Some users are abrasive, but still contribute to the site. Eventually they cross the line and get anonymised, and suddenly, I have no idea who they are anymore. I'm thinking ankarbass & creativedissonance, for example.

Reading K5 is like watching a retard trying to tie his shoelaces. Entertaining, but also a little bit sad.
- Des Beelzebubs Rechtsbeistand


intrigued by your idea that fascism is feminine - livus
[ Parent ]

SCOOP x KARMA (2.33 / 3) (#85)
by adimovk5 on Wed Apr 12, 2006 at 08:19:36 PM EST

Is it possible to combine a KARMA type system with the current ratings system?

Currently users have the power to rate a comment as 0,1,2,3 and rate a story FP+1,SP+1,0,-1. Can a rating system be added that lets any individual rate another from their own user page? You would have two zones to place people in. +1 would be for users who consistently make comments you like. -1 would be for users who consistently make comments you dislike. At anytime, users would be able to add or remove people from their like and dislike zones. Each user would have a peer rating based on the sum of all + and - ratings on them.

The peer rating would act as a multiplier. A peer rating of 100 would double your vote. A peer rating of 1000 would triple your vote. A peer rating of 10000 would quadruple your vote. People who have gained the trust and appreciation of their peers would have more weight in the community.

100 peer comment vote = 0,2,4,6
1000 peer comment vote = 0,3,6,9
10000 peer comment vote = 0,4,8,12

100 peer story vote = +2,0,-2
1000 peer story vote = +3,0,-3
10000 peer story vote = +4,0,-4

It should difficult and time consuming for abusers to create 100 (or 1000) dupe accounts and link them together. The attempt would also be very visible to moderators.

Users with a peer rating of less than 100 would have the normal voting power. Negative ratings would have no negative multiplier. This would discourage people from trying to silence a user with a flood of negatives.

i think k5 should track ips (1.80 / 5) (#97)
by circletimessquare on Thu Apr 13, 2006 at 12:07:31 AM EST

internally, not publicly

so if someone else signs in from the same ip in a small time window, deny them

of course, if two people at megacorporation xyz are working behind the same firewall, then this is a false positive

and someone can spoof ips as well

and if someone has a home computer/ work computer, then there's two accounts they can control as well (but not at the same time easily... well... they can VNC)

but there you go: i'm not proposing this to be perfect, because no one can make a system that perfectly denies all dupe accounts

no one can ever do that, all they can do is make it difficult to varying degrees

the analogy to what i'm talking about here is a fence: it denies casual people taking shortcuts across your yard to get to the bus stop, but it doesn't stop the determined fence jumper who wants to put toilet paper in your trees on halloween

and yet a fence, even though not perfect, is still useful in this world and deters the majority of casual malfeasance

and so it should be with ip tracking and k5


The tigers of wrath are wiser than the horses of instruction.

Perhaps it might (3.00 / 2) (#98)
by Orion Blastar Again on Thu Apr 13, 2006 at 12:30:51 AM EST

but what is to stop some dupe account from using a web proxy to hide their IP as the proxy IP? There are programs out there like Multiproxy that can switch between thousands of public proxy servers quicker than the duper can change accounts.

What about ISPs like AOL that shares IPs with its users by constantly changing them. If one user has an IP, within 15 seconds a next one might have it. All the duper need do is wait for AOL to change the IP they are using and then log in with a different account.

What about Tor/Onion protocols?

What about legitamate uses for using the same IP, like roommates, spouses, friends visiting ect sharing the same Internet connection IP. What if a few users log in from the same Cyber Cafe in their area, that hides behind a firewall that has a single IP?

Learn how to be a liberal.
I can't believe it's not Liberalism!
"Thanks for the pointers on using the internet. You're links to uncylopedia have turned my life around." -zenador

[ Parent ]

like i said (2.00 / 2) (#100)
by circletimessquare on Thu Apr 13, 2006 at 12:57:21 AM EST

its a fence, its not perfect

in other words, pointing out that a solution is not perfect does invalidate the solution, for there exists no perfect solution against human ingenuity

you can only make it harder and more difficult for dupers, that's all you can ever do

and ip tracking is a first easy step

as for the false positives you point out: sounds pretty dang rare to me. and any false positive "access denied" page someone gets can easily link to a request to be whitelisted, which can be done automatically if requested, and then someone can review the requests at a later point and reverse any that are dubious

or, automatically whitelist all dupe ips: no false positives. then track all of those shared ips, and manually blacklist the obvious abusers, even to the point of retroactively removing the accounts and all of their comments/ mods/ votes. after doing that, yu might even see some clear and obvious patterns of abuse that you could kick into automatic denial. so you have automatic whitelists, manual whitelists, automatic blacklists, and manual blacklists. combine those 4 things in the right configuration, and you can have a low maintenance (a slow as possible) system for dupe detection, denial, and destruction

complicated? yes. imperfect? yes. messy? yes.

again: there exists no such technological system pointed against human ingenuity that is not messy and imperfect and complicated

so it is, so it always has been, so it always will be


The tigers of wrath are wiser than the horses of instruction.

[ Parent ]

That would suck (3.00 / 3) (#108)
by SoupIsGoodFood on Thu Apr 13, 2006 at 03:59:59 AM EST

And it wouldn't rid K5 of the real offenders.

[ Parent ]
Your analogy fails (none / 1) (#128)
by nusuth on Thu Apr 13, 2006 at 12:59:44 PM EST

the analogy to what i'm talking about here is a fence: it denies casual people taking shortcuts across your yard to get to the bus stop, but it doesn't stop the determined fence jumper who wants to put toilet paper in your trees on halloween
No one creates dupe accounts casually. It already requires spending some time setting it up and intent to do something malicious with a dupe account. So you are proposing to raise a fence against a determined fence jumper and no one else. As you point out, the fence won't stop him. Since there is no one else to stop, the fence will be totally useless, not just an imperfect solution.

[ Parent ]
Nonsense. I'm not malicious, (none / 1) (#194)
by mr strange on Fri Apr 14, 2006 at 08:47:45 PM EST

...yet I have dupe accounts. If I had to set up Tor or Onion, or work out how to use multiproxy or whatever, I would not have dupe accounts.

Jason Pawloski-style sociopaths would still be a problem, but as cts said, they are not the target here.

In any case, there are already limits to new dupe accounts. I beleive that you can only make 3(?) new accounts from any IP in the same day(?). You cannot reuse e-mail addresses to make a dupe account, so you either need a new gmail for each dupe, or you need to have your own domain.

Try my event calendar plugin for Wordpress.

intrigued by your idea that fascism is feminine - livus
[ Parent ]

ip tracking (3.00 / 2) (#154)
by aphrael on Thu Apr 13, 2006 at 08:23:22 PM EST

scoop certainly supports internal ip tracking of the sort you are postulating.

[ Parent ]
Thereby limiting a given coffee shop to (3.00 / 4) (#172)
by glor on Fri Apr 14, 2006 at 03:08:13 AM EST

a single k5 troll.

--
Disclaimer: I am not the most intelligent kuron.
[ Parent ]

2 problems with this mike (2.75 / 16) (#101)
by circletimessquare on Thu Apr 13, 2006 at 01:29:16 AM EST

you're creating an aristocracy, a class system, and putting the onus of attention on the online identities, rather than the comments themselves

this would have the perverse effect of taking people's focus away from the subject of comments and towards the users themselves

its not easy, as it is, for any discussion to not get personal. its just human nature. but to give some people gold stars of trust and let them wade out there into the comments is like giving them a big fat target for attack. so every single discussion in a site of trusted/ untrusted users would quickly devolve into personal attacks: us versus them. its just human nature at work: people resent that someone else is "special" and they are not "special". no matter what the basis for the differentiation. the mere existence of drawing a line in the sand between classes of people immediately becomes the prime focus of their attention

plus, you mention this avocado site, or whatever the hell it is called (the number of atoms in a mole from high school chemistry?) is a model of decorum and good behavior

fuck that!

any website that is a model of good behavior is also a DEAD site. the problem with ANY system that tries to get people to behave well also has the complementary, and completely unavoidable, side effect of also removing all of the passion in the comments

so this trust system in two ways would destroy k5: it would make every discussion personal, and it would suck the passion on the subject matter out of the comments

my whole take is that people just have to get used to asocial negative assholes, and develop a thick skin about them. there is no technological fix for asocial negativity. there is no ivory tower of behavior you could create, by any mechanism, that not also removes anything you would find interesting about a community forum as well.

so the lesson?

get used to asocial negative assholes. keep light on your feet. they never go away in your life, online or off. simply develop skills to repel, dissuade, or destroy them.

myself? i coopt them

i find them enjoyable. anyone who gets personal with me in a deeply invovled way is a round-about compliment: to devote so much attention to you, even if deeply negative for stupid random hysterical reasons, can be nothing but complementary and ego stoking in the end. it is the fragile/ weak sycophantic ego that latches onto someone parasitically if they are of any renown or easy character identification. their personal attacks are not a symptom of your identity, but their own lack of an identity and ego

so if i were you mike, i'd revel in anyone who gives you personal attention. that it is pointedly negative is a secondary observation, and you can build up your sense of humor by looking at the negativity and finding in it comedy rather than tragedy ;-)

then you can go back to what brought you to k5 in the first place: focusing on the issues, rather than the personalities. the personalities mean nothing, the subject matter does. remain true to that, and no troll can ever touch you. don't swallow their troll by agreeing with them to make it personal ;-)

or, if you're in a bad mood, pull out the RPG and hunt the fuckers down. sometimes its just fun for me to go all wwiii on trolls: make it dead personal, more personal than the troll can swallow. but you have to have the heart of a rabid troll yourself, as i do, to choose that route ;-P

its still quite amusing for me to see some new little troll wander up to me, looking to lure me into their cave, and then have me for supper. so sometimes, depending on my mood, i'll limp after them, all broken and lost and innocent... and then, once in the cave of a sycophantic "you!" "no you!" retarded thread, the little troll finds themselves, at comment #300, wasted and drained and desperate and face to face with a big ugly evil thick hide battle scarred troll they didn't see at first: me

and i'm the one who has supper. hehe *burp* *hiccup*


The tigers of wrath are wiser than the horses of instruction.

A model of decorum and good behavior (3.00 / 2) (#109)
by SoupIsGoodFood on Thu Apr 13, 2006 at 04:04:25 AM EST

But certain kinds of bad behaviour are encoraged here. The general attitude of K5 determine what is considered good and bad.

[ Parent ]
For fuck's sake... (3.00 / 2) (#112)
by mirleid on Thu Apr 13, 2006 at 06:24:45 AM EST

...you ruined it. I no longer trust you. How could you post something that I actually agree with?...

Shame on you!

BTW, it's Avogadro...

Chickens don't give milk
[ Parent ]
what does the number of atoms in a mole, (none / 0) (#115)
by circletimessquare on Thu Apr 13, 2006 at 07:56:22 AM EST

6x10^23 i think, have to do with trustworthy web communities again?

RTFA, i know, RTFA...


The tigers of wrath are wiser than the horses of instruction.

[ Parent ]

My thoughts exactly. (none / 1) (#123)
by rholliday on Thu Apr 13, 2006 at 11:27:06 AM EST

I changed it to Encourage (3) then I saw something about a Filipino Horror Movie and I'm like "wait a second ..."

I still clicked Rate All, but man did it mess with my worldview. :)


Survival Guide: Dust Settles. You too can destroy the world!
[ Parent ]
what's wrong with a fhm? nt (none / 0) (#143)
by circletimessquare on Thu Apr 13, 2006 at 03:19:02 PM EST



The tigers of wrath are wiser than the horses of instruction.

[ Parent ]
I don't know about him (none / 1) (#146)
by curien on Thu Apr 13, 2006 at 05:49:01 PM EST

But a lot of times I read the posts without noticing who the author is. I only realize who wrote it when I read a familiar sig. So it might not have been the Filipino horror movie per se, but the realization that he was agreeing with you, and it was the sig that tipped him off.

--
We are not the same. I'm an American, and you're a sick asshole.
[ Parent ]
upon your shoulders rest our future (3.00 / 3) (#182)
by circletimessquare on Fri Apr 14, 2006 at 01:20:36 PM EST

i'm not joking

its in noticing the words before the personalities that not only makes a good website, but a good offline society as well

when the focus is all on the personalities, regardless of the words, you get paris hilton ;-P you also get people saying things like "all americans this" or "all muslims that"

so, as someone who hates paris hilton, and hates ethnocentric racists, i thank you for looking at words, and not noticing who writes them

because it is the assholes who focus on the "who" before the "what" that are our downfall

and it is people like you who are our salvation

i'm not in any way joking


The tigers of wrath are wiser than the horses of instruction.

[ Parent ]

damn you cts ... (none / 1) (#208)
by rholliday on Sun Apr 16, 2006 at 01:20:39 PM EST

You made me do it again. :)

But those are inspired words, and I completely agree. And your point applies not only to mirleid, curien, and me reading your words before noticing (or in spite of) your username, but to the very system discussed in this article.


Survival Guide: Dust Settles. You too can destroy the world!
[ Parent ]
exactamundo ;-) nt (none / 0) (#209)
by circletimessquare on Sun Apr 16, 2006 at 01:47:21 PM EST



The tigers of wrath are wiser than the horses of instruction.

[ Parent ]
cts, when you're right, you're right. (3.00 / 7) (#176)
by rusty on Fri Apr 14, 2006 at 11:38:18 AM EST

I thought about doing some sort of trust network thing like Advogato's way back in the day, when Advogato was new. It was another one of the Slashdot-splinter sites started at around the same time as K5, and they knew about us and we knew about them. I talked to Raph about how the trust model worked a few times.

But I decided against it then, for reasons that I'm even more certain of today. The first problem is, what are you actually rating? On Advogato, you're supposed to certify that people have attained, to your own certain knowlege, a particular level of mastery in open source programming. That's at least a somewhat clear standard, although it's still open to cliquishness and personal judgements.

But here, the only thing we could be certifying is essentially, "I know this person to have the same opinion as me about what K5 is for." You can pretty that up in language like "a good user" or "a non-abusive user," but it comes to the same thing. At the very best, it would just formalize what we already know -- that there are lots of opinions about what K5 should be, and there's a pretty constant struggle between several of the most widely-held ones. So we'd either have several competing trust networks that would reach a sort of equilibrium, or one of these trust networks would be privileged and eventually wipe out the rest. I tend to believe that latter case, because of the way the trust network functions -- whatever the seed nodes thought the site was for would eventually be the only thing that anyone thought.

So at best we get what we have now, and at worst (and more likely) we end up with a dead monoculture.

I believed that was the flaw in 2000, and now I'm sure of it. But besides that problem, I've come to think basically what you say -- the "problems" of K5 are the problems of human social life. They are not technological flaws -- they are facts of how people get along together, or fail to get along together, in any context. I'm still amazed by the number of times every week I hear about some conflict between people -- in the news, or from friends, conflicts as big as international wars and as small as neighborhood disputes -- and that I can map directly onto some K5 conflict.

What we have here, and almost purely by accident, is a very good pocket-scale model of human social life. It's a bunch of people trying to work together under rules they don't necessarily control (or always understand) and where many of them have totally opposing views about what they should be working for and how they should be going about it. We could "solve" our problems in many ways, but I think all of them would leave us with a broken model. What they all boil down to is essentially a gated suburb, where we let in the "good" people and keep out the "bad" people. I'm not very interested in that.

What I am interested in are ways to make K5 more accurately model human social conditions. I would like to give you people more power to determine the fundamental rules by which the site operates. But I haven't had many good ideas on that line lately, and I keep running up against the dupe problem whenever I think about it. It seems pointless to me to go down that road any further until we can ensure that an individual here is truly a single individual. Without that facility, we'd just become an instant kleptocracy of the ballot-stuffers. And advogato-style trust networks don't really address that problem in a global, pseudonymous way. You could have a network designed to certify people as "an actual individual with no other K5 accounts," but then everyone has to know several people personally to get trusted. I don't like that idea. More cliques.

So that's my take on it.

____
Not the real rusty
[ Parent ]

yup ;-) (3.00 / 4) (#181)
by circletimessquare on Fri Apr 14, 2006 at 12:54:54 PM EST

what you got here on k5 is pioneer type stuff

i don't buy the whole matrixy WoW idea that we're going to be sitting in a chair with Jaron Lanier VR goggles on, dead in meatspace as unmoving blobs and alive in cyberspace as keanu reaves

what i DO believe is that something like k5 will further and further supplement our real lives with a shadow life on the internet. that our monikers will become as much our identity as our real selves. and this shadow life will be as a member of another type of society in pursuit of a goal: get laid, pursue a political agenda, let off steam, etc

look at myspace. its a supplement to real life. its a big game of identity posturing, like teenagers exploring being goth or punk (and soon to wind up as boring housewives and 9-5 shlubs). its the stat eof the internet: the teenage years. what happens to all those people posturing on myspace as they grow up?

they look to the internet, where you are still you, but a more idealized you as you see yourself. it's escape. and there is some mass appeal there. there is room for myspace philosophically where people are allowed to purse their alternative identities even further online, as a further supplement/ catharthis to the shit they have to deal with in real life: frustration at not seeing their political causes met, frustration at people not seeing the real sexy them, frsutration at not achieving their potential that somehow KNOW exists in them. thes eonline gathering become therefore then something huge in terms of blood sweat and tears people pump into them

i've always been a fan of channel 2, where japanese society floats to at night and becomes an alternative culture, lets themselves be what they are not in real life. escapes to real life, catharsis, supplements to real life. this is the future i think, here in the us. and notice something about channel 2: IT'S ALL NEGATIVE ASOCIAL IMPULSES. and: ITS ALL ANONYMOUS. and: ITS MORE THAN A BREAKWAY HIT, ITS SO HUGE ITS BECOME A PART OF THE FABRIC OF JAPANESE CULTURE AT LARGE. i still cant decide though if this observation is only valid for japan, or everywhere:

Q: Why did you decide to use perfect anonymity, not even requiring a user name?

A: Because delivering news without taking any risk is very important to us. There is a lot of information disclosure or secret news gathered on Channel 2. Few people would post that kind of information by taking a risk. Moreover, people can only truly discuss something when they don't know each other.

If there is a user ID attached to a user, a discussion tends to become a criticizing game. On the other hand, under the anonymous system, even though your opinion/information is criticized, you don't know with whom to be upset. Also with a user ID, those who participate in the site for a long time tend to have authority, and it becomes difficult for a user to disagree with them. Under a perfectly anonymous system, you can say, "it's boring," if it is actually boring. All information is treated equally; only an accurate argument will work.

is this bad? NO! it serves a purpose. it's catharthis. i think the end result of evolution of places like myspace, kuro5hin, etc. is to serve society the same role that pornography does: somewhere to put asocial negative impulses that cannot find expression in the real world. pornography serves society: catharsis. online forums serve society the same way: catharsis for nonsexual asocial impulses

and the future is in the hands of tinkerers like you who develop the best possible model for the expression of these shadow selves. its a matter of hitting upon the right formula, and no matter what happens to k5 in the future, its already made its mark in the history books as an experimental hub of activity that set the standard for what was to come, on this site, or elsewhere

in other words, the future is all asocial negative assholes, and this is GOOD lol

and i know this, because like all consumer electronics, japan is permanently 18 months ahead of us ;-P


The tigers of wrath are wiser than the horses of instruction.

[ Parent ]

What about paying users? (2.33 / 3) (#102)
by coljac on Thu Apr 13, 2006 at 02:30:57 AM EST

Paying users would make good seeds - they are unlikely to be dupes. They might still be incorrigible trolls, but for these people there trust would be eroded away by actual users.

Personally I've flirted with making a secret shadow-K5 that's invitation only. I can't be the only one who's had this daydream.

---
Whether or not life is discovered there I think Jupiter should be declared an enemy planet. - Jack Handey

Yes, hulver had that same dream (none / 1) (#159)
by LilDebbie on Thu Apr 13, 2006 at 09:48:37 PM EST

look how well that turned out.

My name is LilDebbie and I have a garden.
- hugin -

[ Parent ]
Title is misleading (2.80 / 5) (#103)
by BottleRocket on Thu Apr 13, 2006 at 02:56:22 AM EST

Nothing can save kuro5hin. One can only prolong its suffering.

$ . . . . . $ . . . . . $ . . . . . $
. ₩ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . * . . . . . * . . . . . * . . . . . * . . . . . *
$ . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $
Yes I do download [child pornography], but I don't keep it any longer than I need to, so it can yield insight as to how to find more. --MDC
$ . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $
. . . . * . . . . . * . . . . . * . . . . . * . . . . . *
. ₩ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
$ . . . . . $ . . . . . $ . . . . . $
$B R Σ III$

Next week on K5 (3.00 / 15) (#104)
by toulouse on Thu Apr 13, 2006 at 03:30:01 AM EST

CAN VASELINE SAVE THE TITANIC??


--
'My god...it's full of blogs.' - ktakki
--


+1SP (2.60 / 5) (#119)
by creature on Thu Apr 13, 2006 at 08:54:51 AM EST

Because you're writing about something with only a teensy tiny mention of yourself (karma whoring on /.).

I don't agree with your solution, though, or even assessment of the problem. In a way I quite like K5's undemocratic gameable system. Life's not fair, after all.

The MrHanky trust metric (2.60 / 5) (#120)
by MrHanky on Thu Apr 13, 2006 at 09:42:18 AM EST

United Fools: -1, section 'humour', probably boring (didn't read).
osm: +1 (didn't read, but liked his earlier stuff).
Egil Skallagrimson: +1FP (didn't read, but he's probably much better now that he's left the site).
MichalCrawford: +1, probably boring but well-formatted and edited.
Tex two point oh: +1, it's chapter two of his detective story.

undecided:
mr strange: gets -1 for form and content.

As you can see, it's possible to vote fairly and objectively on basis of my trust metric, based on personal prejudices, headlines, section and topic. So why don't we just keep the site as it is? Admittedly, I have no idea whether this comment is on topic or not, since I never read your article. But based on my trust metric, I'll just have to trust that it is.


"This was great, because it was a bunch of mature players who were able to express themselves and talk politics." Lettuce B-Free, on being a total fucking moron for Ron Paul.

fundamentaly disagree with premise (2.83 / 6) (#124)
by Linux or Mac OS X on Thu Apr 13, 2006 at 12:38:10 PM EST

based on the data that I can see, k5 is reaching more people, and serving more page views, than it has ever before (barring occasional specific-event related spikes).

first, prove your premise that k5 needs 'saving', THEN provide your method to fix it.


"Ugh, my stomach is full of tequila and semen." - LilDebbie


ysb

I don't remember the occasion ... (none / 0) (#127)
by Ignore Amos on Thu Apr 13, 2006 at 12:54:37 PM EST

... for the huge spike in Q1 '03. Could somebody please refresh my memory?

And that explains why airplanes carry cargo on small boats floating in their cargo aquarium. - jmzero
[ Parent ]

iraq war? (none / 0) (#130)
by Linux or Mac OS X on Thu Apr 13, 2006 at 01:22:06 PM EST

or is my recent history off


"Ugh, my stomach is full of tequila and semen." - LilDebbie


ysb
[ Parent ]
That would be March '03, ... (none / 0) (#132)
by Ignore Amos on Thu Apr 13, 2006 at 01:28:49 PM EST

... but from the graph, it looks like the spike occurred in late January or early February. Archive.org seems to have mis-indexed the February pages, though, so it's hard to be sure.

And that explains why airplanes carry cargo on small boats floating in their cargo aquarium. - jmzero
[ Parent ]

ah, well then (none / 1) (#133)
by Linux or Mac OS X on Thu Apr 13, 2006 at 01:30:20 PM EST

the run up to the war was more active, blogging-wise, than the actual invasion.


"Ugh, my stomach is full of tequila and semen." - LilDebbie


ysb
[ Parent ]
Good point. /nt (none / 0) (#137)
by Ignore Amos on Thu Apr 13, 2006 at 01:38:15 PM EST


And that explains why airplanes carry cargo on small boats floating in their cargo aquarium. - jmzero
[ Parent ]

three words: fuck natalee holloway (none / 1) (#147)
by karson on Thu Apr 13, 2006 at 06:45:57 PM EST

that's my hypothesis for the (sustained) increase in traffic over the past year.

[ Parent ]
Not really (3.00 / 3) (#175)
by rusty on Fri Apr 14, 2006 at 11:14:26 AM EST

We've been very steady at about 2.5 million pages a month for well over a year. I think it's going on two years now. Natalee didn't have much of an impact, besides exposing a lot of people who really weren't ready for it to K5's unique viewpoint, via Google. :-)

We're also not serving more page views than ever (as LoSX said above). The peak was I think about 8 million pages a month, maybe 7.5, circa 2003. The whole life-of-site traffic graph would look something like a fairly steep climb from 0 in 1999 to about 7.5 million per month by 2003, then a sharp drop right after that down to about 5 million (we had a lot of server issues around that time, with the traffic, and that was around when all the HuSi people left) and then a gradual decline over the next year or so to 2.5-3 million. And there we stayed through 05 and 06. My operating theory is that that declining period was when a lot of new blogs came online, and people stared having web community options for stuff other than technology that weren't K5. So we weren't the only game in town anymore, and a lot of folks filtered off to the various new political and etc. sites.

What we're at right now, I think, is a sort of mature equilibrium. People are largely here not because they don't want to be elsewhere (Slashdot, or whatever) but because they actually want to be here. I'm pretty happy with that. And 2.5-3 million pages a month doesn't cause me any headaches in the hardware department. So by all means, don't tell your friends about K5. :-)

____
Not the real rusty
[ Parent ]

but, but, but (none / 0) (#191)
by Linux or Mac OS X on Fri Apr 14, 2006 at 06:31:30 PM EST

k5 is DYING!


"Ugh, my stomach is full of tequila and semen." - LilDebbie


ysb
[ Parent ]
So are you, and so am I (none / 1) (#203)
by rusty on Sat Apr 15, 2006 at 02:23:16 PM EST

I always took it as a good sign that K5 was dying. That means it's alive. As long as we keep on dying, things'll be alright. :-)

____
Not the real rusty
[ Parent ]
One persons junk... (2.75 / 4) (#141)
by Znork on Thu Apr 13, 2006 at 02:36:59 PM EST

Personally, I think the whole premise of moderation systems is flawed.

In their nature they cannot accomplish what they set out to do; to weed out undesireable content, simply because different people have different concepts of what is acceptable discourse, and keeping moderation and emotions apart is an excessivly difficult excercise for many.

At best they create a neutral content, at worst, and most commonly, they enforce cliquishness.

However, change the foundation, dont aim to create one version acceptable for everyone, or for every trusted person, but aim instead for creating a system that will dynamically alter the content for each user, based on their web of trust and moderation. Why should a story need to get FP for everyone? Why should I assign the same worth to the vote of a stranger I dont trust as I do a longtime contributor? The votes of five users I trust, or their trusted assoicates, by far outweigh the rest.

A system where each users view originates in their own trust relationships is far harder to game than any system trying to establish a common denominator.

the admins were actually talking about this (none / 0) (#153)
by aphrael on Thu Apr 13, 2006 at 08:21:40 PM EST

The trouble I have, though, is this: wouldn't that also invite cliqueishness?

[ Parent ]
You cannot prevent cliqueishness (none / 1) (#157)
by maynard on Thu Apr 13, 2006 at 09:34:10 PM EST

That is not how people behave. IMO: the real issue is that this service is meaningless to the vast majority of readers: anonymous heros. Those are the people who pay the bills by viewing ads. The rest of us here is a sideshow.

Read The Proxies, a short crime thriller.
[ Parent ]
True. (none / 0) (#174)
by Znork on Fri Apr 14, 2006 at 04:04:28 AM EST

To be useful to those users they'd have to create an account, or get a cookie set and have a very easy interface to set up basic trust (ie, something like a button under each comment with a function like 'never see anything by this user again and increase trust for moderation by users adding author to killfile'.)

[ Parent ]
Depending on purpose. (none / 0) (#173)
by Znork on Fri Apr 14, 2006 at 03:57:58 AM EST

As the actual goal of moderation is to provide a palatable experience to the users, that is actually in line with the purpose.

It creates a clique surrounding the actual user rather than one enforcing the standards of a particular clique. It's like the freedom of expression versus freedom of not listening. They're not really opposing freedoms, and you can have both.

Thus, it defuses conflicts, rather than create them.

And for people who enjoy opposing opinions, well, nobody is forcing us to trust anyones moderation, we can have an all-inclusive clique if we want.

[ Parent ]

Maybe (none / 0) (#192)
by godix on Fri Apr 14, 2006 at 08:18:35 PM EST

Depends on how far the idea was taken. If the trust metric determined if I see a story at all or not then yes, it'd turn into a huge circlejerk. OTOH if everyone saw the same content and the metric just determined if it was FP or SP for users then the cliqueishness would be minimized.

Besides, K5 already has cliqueishness. There are a fair number of users who read only articles and never touch the diaries. I wouldn't be suprised if the reverse were true. Similarly the fiction section has become a clique, the standing joke that Localroger can get anything posted to fiction and the fict-1on show that. It's not like you'd be ADDING cliqueishness to K5.

Personally I'd like the ability to have some users diaries appear as FP and that ability to make sure some catagories never appear on my FP. I think a trust metric isn't needed, just a form to let me decide what's on my FP based on sectioning and/or user.

More CORN!

[ Parent ]

People should be expose to contrary views. (3.00 / 2) (#195)
by mr strange on Fri Apr 14, 2006 at 08:57:07 PM EST

KingRamsis is a perfect example. I don't like his views, but I think it's great that K5 gives him a platform to spout his shit to a wide audience.

A few may be convinced. More will hone their counter-arguments. All are enriched.

A scheme which only shows you what you want to hear sounds really creepy to me.

Will your home be underwater? Check on my maps of sea level rise.

intrigued by your idea that fascism is feminine - livus
[ Parent ]

You said it yourself. (3.00 / 3) (#202)
by Znork on Sat Apr 15, 2006 at 11:32:35 AM EST

"I don't like his views, but..."

Which means that you want to see his views, which means you would rate a plus on his comments, which means you'd get a positive trust relationship with people who also rated his comments up.

See? After a while, the system will map out your trust relationship to be strongest with other people who enjoy dissenting views, which would still leave you filtered from pure trolls. Such a system doesnt suppress dissent, it merely maps your viewing trust preferences to other people with similar viewing preferences. If you want the trolls, you see the trolls, if you want the dupes, you see the dupes, if you want KingRamsis, you see KingRamsis.

The only way you could get a conformist view would be if you actually did rate according to opinions. In which case I'd personally be happy that I wouldnt get a trust relationship formed with your ratings.

[ Parent ]

misses the point (3.00 / 2) (#205)
by Entendre Entendre on Sat Apr 15, 2006 at 03:33:13 PM EST

The audience is not captive. If they see too much that they don't like, they'll just leave. Under the current system, K5 selects for crapflooders, assholes, trolls, biters, etc. People who can't tolerate crap just leave.

If the goal is to assemble a community of thick-skinned individuals, K5's system is admirable. If the goal is to assemble a community of intelligent people who value thoughtful discourse, K5's system blows.

You seem to think that a system that that lets people filter their view of the site would lead to people filtering out opinions contrary to their own. I think that it would lead to people filtering out poop jokes and similar idiocy.

You said that you don't like KingRamsis, for example, but that you welcome his presence. I think that most people would agree with you. Opposing viewpoints make the site interesting. I don't see any reason to worry that people would tailor their view of the site to be uninteresting.

You are an authoritarian who fears letting people have what they want. I am a libertarian who trusts people to select what they need.

--
Reduce firearm violence: aim carefully.
[ Parent ]

What if (none / 1) (#148)
by cronian on Thu Apr 13, 2006 at 07:06:27 PM EST

I don't trust avrogodo because he has 6.023*10^23 too many in his mole hole. For when I respond to the moldy trust, I might as well be at slashdot.

We perfect it; Congress kills it; They make it; We Import it; It must be anti-Americanism
This is a step backwards. (2.85 / 7) (#149)
by The Vast Right Wing Conspiracy on Thu Apr 13, 2006 at 07:43:20 PM EST

Systems where moderation is restricted are subject to groupthink feedback. People who conform to the groupthink are rewarded with moderation abilities, and use them to reinforce the groupthink.

Why is this a good idea again?

___
I'm a pompous windbag, I take myself far too seriously, and I single-handedly messed up K5 by causing the fiction section to be created. --localroger

Yes, back to the future! (3.00 / 2) (#163)
by OzJuggler on Fri Apr 14, 2006 at 01:11:05 AM EST

This is the way it's always been done. I think it's the way most forums and blogs will be run in the future once the benefits are widely recognised.

Our real tangible societies operate on trust networks, so online forums with trust networks would operate the same way - with everything that entails. Just like real societies, the tyranny of the majority over the minority (right or not) would occur. I still think it would be a net improvement (pun intended), but I'm not denying that the foibles of humanity would remain. We are human after all.

For example, it's not democratic (it's a multilayered oligarchy) but then kuro5hin isn't democratic either. And it has to be that way for the purpose of keeping out the riff-raff or else an army of new dupes could spawn out of nowhere and just promote their own agent to king.
Most real tribal societies aren't democratic either - what the leader says becomes law. Hmm, actually this sounds more and more like the USA. Bugger.

OzJuggler.
"And I will not rest until every year families gather to spend December 25th together
at Osama's homo abortion pot and commie jizzporium." - Jon Stewart's gift to Bill O'Reilly, 7 Dec 2005.
[ Parent ]

ATN: Michael... (2.50 / 2) (#151)
by terryfunk on Thu Apr 13, 2006 at 08:18:00 PM EST

How much would you charge if I commissioned you for an original 15 min instrumental work and burn a copy on CD?

Think about it and let me know.

I like you, I'll kill you last. - Killer Clown
The ScuttledMonkey: A Story Collection

I'd be happy to do it (none / 0) (#152)
by MichaelCrawford on Thu Apr 13, 2006 at 08:20:47 PM EST

... but, as I had not composed for a long time, it's going slowly now. It would probably take the rest of the year to complete it.

I want to reassure you, I'm not abandoning my music for my writing, not by any means.


--

Live your fucking life. Sue someone on the Internet. Write a fucking music player. Like the great man Michael David Crawford has shown us all: Hard work, a strong will to stalk, and a few fries short of a happy meal goes a long way. -- bride of spidy


[ Parent ]

Good!...but... (none / 0) (#155)
by terryfunk on Thu Apr 13, 2006 at 08:27:31 PM EST

think about it...I don't need an answer right away.

I like you, I'll kill you last. - Killer Clown
The ScuttledMonkey: A Story Collection

[ Parent ]
I'm thinking, definitely (none / 0) (#156)
by MichaelCrawford on Thu Apr 13, 2006 at 09:17:00 PM EST

Fifteen minutes of music that would really be worthwhile listening to is a big job. So I won't have an answer for you right away.

But I know I'd like to do it.


You gotta watch those sour grapes. When they come out of the business end of a railgun at ten percent of the speed of light, they can seriously ruin your day
[ Parent ]

You can do it. (none / 0) (#168)
by bamcquern on Fri Apr 14, 2006 at 01:57:04 AM EST

Prioritize. What would be more satisfying, work-wise, than finishing the composition of a new piece?

[ Parent ]
I don't think anything would be so wonderful (none / 0) (#169)
by MichaelCrawford on Fri Apr 14, 2006 at 02:15:01 AM EST

I'm completely committed to publishing a full-length compact disc by the end of the year. But it's going very slowly so far.


You gotta watch those sour grapes. When they come out of the business end of a railgun at ten percent of the speed of light, they can seriously ruin your day
[ Parent ]

Try new methods of spurring creativity. (none / 1) (#170)
by bamcquern on Fri Apr 14, 2006 at 02:20:26 AM EST

Half-sleep, or lucid dreaming. Television drone. Meditation.

Select notes stochastically and figure out which ones you like together!

Listen to something you don't normally listen to. Listen to music completely apart from what you play.

Try the synesthetic method. Read a poem, look at a painting, watch a film at the revival theater, and then sit at the piano.

Find new inspiration!

Compose in new places. Sleep in a different room for a couple of weeks. Change your daily habits. Start waking up at 7 a.m. instead of 8 p.m. (or whatever it is you're doing these days).

[ Parent ]

Yes, those kinds of things help (none / 0) (#171)
by MichaelCrawford on Fri Apr 14, 2006 at 02:26:03 AM EST

And tonight, I actually did wake up at 8 PM!


You gotta watch those sour grapes. When they come out of the business end of a railgun at ten percent of the speed of light, they can seriously ruin your day
[ Parent ]

Clever approach! (3.00 / 2) (#187)
by Ignore Amos on Fri Apr 14, 2006 at 02:10:47 PM EST

Divert his attention from posting on k5 by occupying him with another task!

Excellent tactic!

And that explains why airplanes carry cargo on small boats floating in their cargo aquarium. - jmzero
[ Parent ]

newsflash (2.25 / 4) (#165)
by loteck on Fri Apr 14, 2006 at 01:37:49 AM EST

k5 is not broken and does not need a major overhaul like this. there are far more simple and elegant solutions to the dupe problem.

mike, if i could post images on k5 right now, i would post a big image of goatse but i would cover the gaping hole with a block of text that blinks and says STOP SUBMITTING STORIES ABOUT YOURSELF/K5 AND TRY SUBMITTING SOMETHING THAT IS INTERESTING OR IN SOME WAY MEANINGFUL.

it would be sweet sweet irony if a dupe horde took down this article, but i hope it gets posted so this comment will get read and maybe a few more people will start -1ing all your retarded meta bullshit. prior to this article i was just annoyed with you, now i'm getting to the point of "-1 michaelcr4wford.com/heyguyslookatmelooklooklooklooklook"
--
"You're in tune to the musical sound of loteck hi-fi, the musical sound that moves right round. Keep on moving ya'll." -Mylakovich
"WHAT AN ETERNAL MOBIUS STRIP OF FELLATIATIC BANALITY THIS IS." -Harry B Otch

How is this about me? (none / 0) (#166)
by MichaelCrawford on Fri Apr 14, 2006 at 01:39:57 AM EST

Two other people have recently been able to demonstrate that their stories were dumped through the use of dupe accounts. People complain about getting modbombed all the time.

I was trying to make a positive contribution to solving two real problems at Kuro5hin. How is that about me?


You gotta watch those sour grapes. When they come out of the business end of a railgun at ten percent of the speed of light, they can seriously ruin your day
[ Parent ]

Almost (2.75 / 4) (#179)
by rusty on Fri Apr 14, 2006 at 12:06:54 PM EST

Two other people have recently been able to demonstrate that their stories were dumped through the use of dupe accounts.

That sentence would be perfect if you just replaced "demonstrate" with "incorrectly assert."

____
Not the real rusty
[ Parent ]

Could you tell us why (none / 0) (#180)
by maynard on Fri Apr 14, 2006 at 12:20:24 PM EST

this hit 75, after the 70 threshold, before posting? Especially since no voters were added to the list of votes in the official tally while it climbed from 70 all the way to 75? I watched.

Read The Proxies, a short crime thriller.
[ Parent ]
Dunno (none / 0) (#190)
by rusty on Fri Apr 14, 2006 at 03:18:39 PM EST

The numbers tally -- 111  - 36 = 75. It is possible that some voters were deleted and their votes erased, but generally that only can be done before the entry posts (or fails to post). What usually happens is some people have it open and reading while it crosses the threshold, and their votes are added on afterward.

____
Not the real rusty
[ Parent ]
probably erased votes (none / 0) (#199)
by janra on Sat Apr 15, 2006 at 01:24:44 AM EST

Given that if you vote on a story after it posts, you get a message to that effect and your vote isn't recorded, I'd say it's due to some voters being erased.

My bet is that it was close to the threshold, some -1 votes got erased, and that put it over the threshold. The next vote (up or down, no matter) triggered the post because it was above the threshold. The vote eraser recalculates the story score but doesn't do any post or drop adjustments at all.
--
Discuss the art and craft of writing
That's the problem with world domination... Nobody is willing to wait for it anymore, work slowly towards it, drink more and enjoy the ride more.
[ Parent ]

Yup (none / 0) (#200)
by MstlyHrmls on Sat Apr 15, 2006 at 05:15:21 AM EST

That story was in the queue when I noticed some dupe votes. I wiped the votes, and next thing I saw it had been posted. Looks like snipping some dead-weight springboarded it...

-mh
--
"That's right," shouted Vroomfondel, "we demand rigidly defined areas of doubt and uncertainty!"
[ Parent ]

Not true (none / 1) (#188)
by Smothie on Fri Apr 14, 2006 at 02:26:03 PM EST

It happened to me years ago on a story I did on Catholocism. When the trolls couldn't outright vote it down, they polluted the story with trollish comments to get the discussion rated low enough to cause the story to tank.

Something like this would fix that.

--

Please visit my scoop site, Guppylog - For help with all livebearing fish.
[ Parent ]

The facts are irrelevant. (none / 1) (#196)
by mr strange on Fri Apr 14, 2006 at 09:01:07 PM EST

The perception is what counts. I'm inclined to believe you and yet still assert that there is a problem that should be addressed. Tricky double-think, I know.

Try my event calendar plugin for Wordpress.

intrigued by your idea that fascism is feminine - livus
[ Parent ]

Well, not really (2.66 / 3) (#204)
by rusty on Sat Apr 15, 2006 at 02:25:26 PM EST

It's not double-think -- clearly there is a problem, which is that the perception of rampant multiple voting still exists. We're thinking about that.

____
Not the real rusty
[ Parent ]
calculate thread values for sorting (2.80 / 5) (#184)
by speek on Fri Apr 14, 2006 at 01:32:27 PM EST

Right now, voting on comments mostly just serves to sort them, but it's pretty useless since comments live in threads and so only the top comment's rating matters. If the entire thread was given a calculated rating at each level, then threads could be sorted meaningfully and comment ratings would actually have some beneficial effect beyond the dubious benefit of the current hiding/not hiding toggle. Story voting up/down seems to mostly work - don't really see a need to play with that. Beyond that, it'd be a shame for rating and voting schemes to get so damn interesting that even more stories were posted about it.

--
al queda is kicking themsleves for not knowing about the levees

thread rating (none / 1) (#211)
by Viliam Bur on Wed Apr 19, 2006 at 07:10:41 AM EST

This would be an easy tool to "rate down" threads one does not like. Just add some stupid comments to them, and the whole thread goes down -- more subtle and efficient then zeroing the parent comment. Just make sure circletimesquare will answer to your comment, and then keep discussion long enough till the whole thread rating drops below zero.

[ Parent ]
I am fascinated by the network flow trust metric 2 (1.66 / 3) (#189)
by Highlander on Fri Apr 14, 2006 at 02:36:59 PM EST

I have looked into advogatos trust metric too.

I wanted to use it for ratings in a multiplayer game, so that players can't cheat too much.

I have a C-algorithm around for doing the calculations which has the option to do them in a "shortcut" way so that it is fast enough. It would however need some work, since I didn't use a hashtable for a vital operation. Also, there might be more sophisticated versions around, cf. papers on it.

Contact me if you are interested in any way.

Here is the blurb I wrote on it initially,

The problem: creating reliable ratings from a user base  
- which may contain people giving false ratings and creating false accounts.
- which has the tendancy to be lazy and giving incomplete ratings
- which needs to be relied upon because there is no other source for ratings ( e.g. contest results )
-------------------------------------------------------
Solution
-------------------------------------------------------
names:
modified domination ranking
reputation network

people give points as they see fit. points given reflect both ability and trust.
-------------------------------------------------------
max flow - push and relabel
use directed graph
The points given from one player to the another are represented by the edge flow capacity.
There are 5 options to give points N(++) N^.75(+)  N^.5[sqrt](equal) N^.25(-) 1[power zero](--) points or to not rate at all(worst) , where N is the rating of the player giving the rating.

The pool gives 100 points(adjustable to get different dynamics) as starting points to every player, so a rating of 1000 represents 10 people you can beat.

So this makes ++ 100 + 32 = 10 -3 --1 points (initially).
For a 1000 rated, a ++ is 1000, a + is 178, a = is 32, a - is 6, -- is 1
The rating of a player is the maximum flow from the pool to the player.
-------------------------------------------------------
In order to be able to change the pool points of 100 to bigger values later to tune the system, a players rating should be displayed as points/pool_points.
-------------------------------------------------------
Be careful who you give a ++ to. A ++ is also a sign of trust.
-------------------------------------------------------
problems: if the number of nodes is big, there is a risk that lots of connections between players and of circularity. This would make for a mass of players with identical ratings. contra: playing against the players with few connections and getting their votes gives higher scores.
-------------------------------------------------------
Someone is abusing the rating system ? Solution: set your rating of him to "no rating". ( a -- rating would be more subtle ). You can go further and set ratings of people who have this player at ++ to "no rating", too.
Memo: make ratings visible, esp. the ++ ratings.
Memo: automate this with a "punish" button. You can only punish people you have rewarded before.
-------------------------------------------------------
Ratings in a clan: A rule that makes sense for a clan is to have the rating system reflect a "chain of command". The chain would look more like a tree. If you rate someone at ++, it reflects that you trust this guy and would obey commands.
-------------------------------------------------------
Extra rules:
Because ++ ratings are dangerous, the one receiving the ++ rating has to accept the rating by giving a -- rating to the rater. This is called a "master-apprentice" relationship because if the master teaches something to the apprentice, the master will profit from the improving ratings of the apprentice. Sometimes, accepting a ++ rating by giving a -- is a little like accepting campaign money from a dubious source in run a for the presidency: it helps your ratings but harms your reputation.

If the return rating rule is applied, a + rating has to be matched by a - rating in return

Comments:
One can apply this rule(return rating rule) to all ratings, but the rating system works slower then and suffers a little from players that do not rate.
-------------------------------------------------------
Return rating rule(optional):
With ++ = +2,  + = +1, = = 0, - = -1, -- = -2, the rating given would be min(rating given, - rating received) with rating received:=0 if no rating has been returned. So if one player gave a ++ and received a -, this would be as if he gave a + and received a - . A + given and a received -- results actually in a + given and a -- received. A + given and a received = results actually in a = given and an = received. A "no rating" always gives away 0 points.
-------------------------------------------------------
A players rating is updated when he receives a rating and when he gives a rating.
-------------------------------------------------------
Problem: computing time needed. To reduce this problem, the graph could be reduced to the 1000 nodes closest to the rated node.
-------------------------------------------------------
rate players that give you ratings and both your points will usually increase a little.
-------------------------------------------------------
Configuration options ( extra database fields required )
The systems works for several categories. There are aliases for categories, so that non-english speakers can also use the system.
There are aliases for participant names so that it works for players from other game services too. This also allows to track name changes.
-------------------------------------------------------
Search, show and modify ratings pages for:
- players that have rated me that I didn't rate yet.
- players that I have rated that didn't rate me yet.
- my masters / my apprentices
-------------------------------------------------------
Display two ranking icons for :
 - better/equal/lower ranked players
 - How I ranked that player.
-------------------------------------------------------
The rating system should be open to other rating systems. Other rating systems might keep track of the last 3 games between two players and issue automatical ratings of ++ for 3:0 + for 2:1or 1:0 = for 1:1(exactly two games) - for 1:2 or 0:1 and -- for 0:3 (and maybe void rating for 0:6).
-------------------------------------------------------
alpha/social net
rating names: is a leader/is an alpha, is better,  is my equal, is worse, is a worker drone/is an epsilon, i don't know him.
aim of the net: get highest rating by all means, except hacking and multiple accounts.
-------------------------------------------------------
Problem: Someone impersonating a person, a celebrity or a company or trademark.
- Reserve the right to give the account to the someone of our choice who has a legitimate claim to it.
-------------------------------------------------------
Problem: When the number of games per player reaches 100(pool points), the = rating might cause the entire network of players with that many ratings to be connected.
- increase the starting pool points(slowly) if that happens. This is the most elegant solution.
- allow only 100 ratings per player ?!
-------------------------------------------------------
Limiting the number of ratings: someone should be able to be rated as often as he has been rated by other player. So no limit there. However, to reduce load on the system,  the ratings given by someone might be reduced to the last 100 ratings. When adding a new rating, it should be checked whether the maximum number of ratings has been reached. If it has been, delete the rating which belongs to the player with the lowest score. Display a warning that this rating has been reset and name its previous value in the message.
-------------------------------------------------------
problem fixing:
if a large number of nodes interconnect, loop-like reationships might occur or become constructed intentionally.
This might result in a large number of similar ratings.
The following things can be done against this:
- Brutally remove ratings that show a circular relationship, esp. ++
- modify the rating scale to not start at ++ =power of 1.0 but at lower value
- modify the pool value for a single player from 100 to maybe 1000
- apply the return rating rule

-------------------------------------------------------
See also: www.advogato.org (.com??)
(also huminity sp?)
-------------------------------------------------------

Moderation in moderation is a good thing.

lol thrust metrics (2.00 / 3) (#198)
by flaw on Sat Apr 15, 2006 at 12:15:49 AM EST

yes plz

--
ピニス, ピニス, everyone loves ピニス!
advogato today (2.50 / 4) (#201)
by daniels on Sat Apr 15, 2006 at 06:41:12 AM EST

The cynic in me says, 'look how well that's worked for Advogato'[0].  It also tells me that you've misdiagnosed what's 'wrong' with K5 today, and you're thus trying to solve a social issue with a technical measure.

[0]: Did I mean that proclus and lkcl somehow magically managed to get certified, or that Advogato is now, for all intents and purposes, dead?  Your call.
--
somewhere in space, this may all be happening right now

what's wrong with k5? (1.50 / 2) (#206)
by lolwhatboy on Sat Apr 15, 2006 at 05:05:20 PM EST

crazy people like michael crawford haven't been WTFBBQPWNED by rusty already.

Can The Advogato Trust Metric Save Kuro5hin? | 212 comments (164 topical, 48 editorial, 0 hidden)
Display: Sort:

kuro5hin.org

[XML]
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective companies. The Rest 2000 - Present Kuro5hin.org Inc.
See our legalese page for copyright policies. Please also read our Privacy Policy.
Kuro5hin.org is powered by Free Software, including Apache, Perl, and Linux, The Scoop Engine that runs this site is freely available, under the terms of the GPL.
Need some help? Email help@kuro5hin.org.
My heart's the long stairs.

Powered by Scoop create account | help/FAQ | mission | links | search | IRC | YOU choose the stories!