From: Vladimir Z. Nuri (in response to Tim May)
hmmmmmmmm, I seem to recall earlier letters in which you advocated a market-type rating system in which services could rate things, in the way that stocks are now rated, doctors/lawyers could be rated, etc.-- let a thousand ratings services bloom. (or maybe we were talking about reputations. in my mind, they are mostly interchangeable--hence my interest in "rating" systems). .....................................................................
In consideration of the difference between "ratings" and "reputation": I think of a rating as something which is attached to something "pre-knowledge", whereas a reputation is something which develops over time & based upon informed knowledge ("after-knowledge"). A rating is applied to something (a service or whatever) by only those few individuals who are acquainted with what they are rating. A reputation is accumulated by the impressions made upon larger numbers of individuals - a general population not necessarily employed to collect these impressions - but who have nevertheless sufficient exposure to and acquaintanceship with the person/service/etc. to make an informed conclusion about it. A rating can make a statement on what something "is" or is expected to be (eg, general in content vs explicitly sexual), where a reputation reflects on past behavior. .. Blanc