Re: Need PGP-awareness in common utilities

17 Dec 2003

      -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

An Igor-like entity wrote something like this:
...
Yes, it can be. When I was writing it I had in mind that I want
to write a general moderation bot that can be _applied_ to USENET.
There is a script processApproved which is called when a message 
should get posted. If you replace the usenet version of processApproved
to mailing list version, you will be done.
Nice design.  :-)
...
...
Anybody wanna hack a perl
script or two to produce/consume content/author ratings for
cypherpunks (it could surely use some!).  We can use my dormant
mailing list, c2punks@c2.net, as a parallel channel to transmit
cypherpunk (and maybe other) ratings.
So, what you want is a tool that accepts "unmoderated" cpunks list,
selects messages by authors with high ratings, and forwards only
these into the "filtered" list? That's neat _if_ ratings are done
by people whose tastes are similar to mine..
Hm.  That might be an interesting addition to my plan, but the 
first step is to generate ratings and to consume them at each
individual's mail-handling site.  So I, for example, would run a
script every time I received mail (or every hour, or every day,
etc) which looked for ratings certificates, PGP-verified them,
and saved the rating in a database.  Then I would run another
script (every time I received mail, or every hour, etc.) which
identified incoming messages and _did_ something to them if 
there were sufficient ratings in the database to merit _doing_
something to them (e.g. delete, promote to a "well-rated"
folder, demote to a "poorly-rated" folder, forward to my
friends, forward to my enemies, etc.).

Now as you astutely note, this is only valuable if you like the
ratings.  Thus it is necessary to have meta-ratings.  The
simplest meta-rating is "rate raters by hand".  That is, you
manually make a list of (potential) raters and put their public
key ID and a coefficient indicating how much you value their
ratings into a meta-ratings database.

More complicated meta-ratings include "how often did I agree
with them", true (acquired from other people) meta-ratings,
and... um..  automated textual analysis or whatever other whacky
heuristic you want to plug in.

This could be so much fun...

Bryce

P.S.  Oh yeah... The demo.  Just a sec.

Message-Id: <199607062132.QAA00782@manifold.algebra.com>
Subject: Re: Need PGP-awareness in common utilities
To: bryce@digicash.com
Date: Sat, 6 Jul 1996 16:32:38 -0500 (CDT)
Cc: ichudov@algebra.com, cypherpunks@toad.com, e$@thumper.vmeng.com
Reply-To: ichudov@algebra.com (Igor Chudov)
In-Reply-To: <199607062117.XAA25154@digicash.com> from "bryce@digicash.com" at Jul 6, 96 11:16:59 pm
From: ichudov@algebra.com (Igor Chudov @ home)
Content-Type: text

bryce@digicash.com wrote:
...
You know, Igor...
(It has been a few months since I was hot on this idea, but
hearing about your practical PGP successes has gotten me
interested again...)
If you have a moderation bot for a Usenet group (and could it be
pressed into service as a mailing list handler I wonder?), this
Yes, it can be. When I was writing it I had in mind that I want
to write a general moderation bot that can be _applied_ to USENET.

There is a script processApproved which is called when a message 
should get posted. If you replace the usenet version of processApproved
to mailing list version, you will be done.
...
would be a nice tool to start with in order to implement
full-fledged content/author ratings.
Well, STUMP is a generic moderation tool.
...
Anybody wanna hack a perl
script or two to produce/consume content/author ratings for
cypherpunks (it could surely use some!).  We can use my dormant
mailing list, c2punks@c2.net, as a parallel channel to transmit
cypherpunk (and maybe other) ratings.
So, what you want is a tool that accepts "unmoderated" cpunks list,
selects messages by authors with high ratings, and forwards only
these into the "filtered" list? That's neat _if_ ratings are done
by people whose tastes are similar to mine..
...
Let me know.  We _could_ adopt the ridiculously simple NoCeM
protocol, or the ever-mutating public key certificates being
designed in a nearby mailing list, or some protocol of our own.
(Shouldn't be too hard to come up with an implementable, useful
protocol.)
?????

	- Igor.

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.2i
Comment: Auto-signed under Unix with 'BAP' Easy-PGP v1.1b2

iQB1AwUBMd7hAkjbHy8sKZitAQGGwwMAtgHInUGs0ugyLJKSzigjNoZ3Tdu3NW7X
NgQkc+1ZyJz8ev43FM2knFmp7F8pImP5wZU9l6swJKsSXuzc7TRi6rObaLdOIVEY
4j0y/UWGGE6O+vGtavzjYOLiuVG7uoWk
=RwfO
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Re: Need PGP-awareness in common utilities

bryce＠digicash.com