Re: Experiments on Mailing Lists
At 11:02 AM 1/4/1997, Timothy C. May wrote:
At 7:49 AM -0800 1/4/97, Peter Hendrickson wrote:
The moderator keeps the cash. The moderator is pulled in several directions. He or she wants to keep the money but also wants people ...blah blah blah....
All of these schemes--some of them pretty clever--for posting tokens, reputation-based killfiles, buying and selling reputation futures, etc., are almost certainly far too complicated to deploy on a list like ours.
...[Interesting Extropian history deleted.]...
So, rather than do similar tinkering with the Cypherpunks list--not that either Hugh Daniel or John Gilmore have given any hint they are willing to do such tinkering--I suggest those who want to try token-based posting, or information markets in reputation capital, or herd-consensus killfiles, etc., set up a separate mailing list and implement whatever they wish.
If the point of these schemes is to filter content (*), there is no reason why they have to be implemented for the entire list. They can always be converted to a tag on the message which readers can use, but are not required to. I'm sure Tim would not object to any scheme implemented in this way. (So sure, in fact, that I will give him a dollar if he does object. ;-) (* If the point is to stop spam attacks, then they do have to affect the entire list.) Peter Hendrickson ph@netcom.com
At 12:43 PM -0800 1/4/97, Peter Hendrickson wrote:
If the point of these schemes is to filter content (*), there is no reason why they have to be implemented for the entire list. They can always be converted to a tag on the message which readers can use, but are not required to.
I'm sure Tim would not object to any scheme implemented in this way. (So sure, in fact, that I will give him a dollar if he does object. ;-)
(* If the point is to stop spam attacks, then they do have to affect the entire list.)
Oh, I would hardly have any objection to any system which is "transparent" to me, i.e., where I can ignore the whole issue. I forgot to mention in my article that one of the serious problems with the various Extropians experiments--and likely to be in any of the new experiments--is that each required learning, with many people never quite getting the hang of how the systems worked. Thus, various FAQs were written--but ignored by those most in need of them. And people asked questions on the list about the process, etc. Ultimately, all of the brainpower which went into how figuring out how "thornes" were traded, how the killfiles worked, etc., were wasted. This is why I favor learning killfiles on my _home_ machine...the comment someone made about how "inefficient" such home-based killfiles are, compared to some hypothetical list-based killfile, ignores this issue that N different mailing list or forums will likely have almost N different systems, syntaxes, etc. Not a timesave in the final analyis to have to learn N killfile approaches! Should "majordomo" be modified in a powerful way, and gain wide distribution, e.g, as "killfiledomo," :-}, then this might establish a kind of standard for such killfile-oriented lists...but I see no likelihood of this happening soon. Again, I think these clever schemes are a waste of time. Except for the one of using the versions of majordomo (which exist, as I understand things) which only allow posts by subscribed members. This may nuke anonymous posts, but so what? The _possibility_ of anonymity, which we mostly all support, does not mean that people have to listen to such posts. And since the junk from anonymous posts is getting to be a serious problem.... Another possibility is that anonymous posts get kicked into a file for later approval or nonapproval by someone. Nothing fancy (that is, no "tokens" and complicated accounting systems, such as have been proposed), just a manual "moderation" by someone, or some set of volunteers, etc. Enough moderation to let the "Red Rackham" sorts of good posts through while blocking the "Make Money Fast" and barnyard insults from making it. If a system is complicated, many or even most people won't use it. Whether PGP or procmail. --Tim May Just say "No" to "Big Brother Inside" We got computers, we're tapping phone lines, I know that that ain't allowed. ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, tcmay@got.net 408-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA | knowledge, reputations, information markets, Higher Power: 2^1398269 | black markets, collapse of governments. "National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway."
Peter Hendrickson wrote:
At 11:02 AM 1/4/1997, Timothy C. May wrote:
All of these schemes--some of them pretty clever--for posting tokens, reputation-based killfiles, buying and selling reputation futures, etc., are almost certainly far too complicated to deploy on a list like ours.
...[Interesting Extropian history deleted.]...
So, rather than do similar tinkering with the Cypherpunks list--not that either Hugh Daniel or John Gilmore have given any hint they are willing to do such tinkering--I suggest those who want to try token-based posting, or information markets in reputation capital, or herd-consensus killfiles, etc., set up a separate mailing list and implement whatever they wish.
If the point of these schemes is to filter content (*), there is no reason why they have to be implemented for the entire list. They can always be converted to a tag on the message which readers can use, but are not required to.
I think this filtering/censorship stuff is getting way too complicated
to be practical. It is in my opinion inappropriate to moderate or
automatically filter the list itself, because that is a form of
censorship. Expecting people to install and use new software is
asking too much.
The way I see it, you have several simple options:
1) read everything, and hit d when you decide a post is noise
2) filter at your own machine - there's lots of software. Presumably
those requesting list server user controlled filtering are saying that
they find it too much hassle to install or learn how to use such
software, or that they don't want to pay for downloading garbage
3) start up a mailing list mirror, subscribe the mirror to
cypherpunks@toad.com, and implement user controlled filtering in
majordomo on the mirror. This frees up some of toad.com's current
load, and puts all filtering load on the mirror. If there's a demand
for such a service, someone can do it.
4) subscribe to a filtered version of cypherpunks, and run the risk
that the owner filters material which would be interesting to you.
5) setup a filtered version of cypherpunks which explicitly filters
just commercial spam, and mail loop errors.
Currently I use method 1. A couple of people lately have so
consistently posted garbage that I am considering it may be worth the
effort of switching to method 2. If someone did 5 and the delay was
reasonably short, I would probably subscribe to it.
The only thing I would be happy to see happen in the way of list based
filtering, is anything to cut out pure commercial, non crypto related
spam. Spammers seem to have discovered mailing lists as efficient
distribution methods in addition to direct mass mailing lately.
Unfortunately this is difficult to filter automatically, and no one
has the time to do it in close to real time, and time lags hinder
discussion.
Adam
--
print pack"C*",split/\D+/,`echo "16iII*o\U@{$/=$z;[(pop,pop,unpack"H*",<>
)]}\EsMsKsN0[lN*1lK[d2%Sa2/d0
"Timothy C. May"
Except for the one of using the versions of majordomo (which exist, as I understand things) which only allow posts by subscribed members. This may nuke anonymous posts, but so what? The _possibility_ of anonymity, which we mostly all support, does not mean that people have to listen to such posts. And since the junk from anonymous posts is getting to be a serious problem....
Another possibility is that anonymous posts get kicked into a file for later approval or nonapproval by someone. Nothing fancy (that is, no "tokens" and complicated accounting systems, such as have been proposed), just a manual "moderation" by someone, or some set of volunteers, etc. Enough moderation to let the "Red Rackham" sorts of good posts through while blocking the "Make Money Fast" and barnyard insults from making it.
Timmy seems to be VERY bothered by those anonymous posts and would surely like them to stop - perfectly illustrating why the "cypher punks" are enemies of free speech. Timmy can killfile anything he doesn't like, but he wants to prevent everyone else from seeing whatever information Timmy doesn't want to be disseminated. You lose, Timmy. The truth wants to be free. --- Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps
Adam Back wrote:
I think this filtering/censorship stuff is getting way too complicated to be practical.
No, it's really fairly simple if you remember a few basics: 1. Tokens will be used for posting on Sunday through Wednesday. 2. Left-handed people can only post between 4 and 6 p.m. 3. People whose last names start with the letters 'a' through 'm' will not have to follow the 'Random Rules'. 4. People whose last names start with the letters 'n' through 'z' will be required to follow the 'Random Rules', but they will not be told what they are until the day following their post. (otherwise, it would destroy the whole idea behind randomizing the posting rules) 5. Dr. DV K will be given two seperate tokens each day. One token will allow him to post a message containing the word 'cock', and the other one will allow him to post a message containing the word 'sucker'. 6. People posting messages such as 'this' one will, eventually, after reading their own postings, realize that they don't have a 'real' life, and kill themselves--thus becoming a solution to their own problem.
Toto wrote: [snip]
5. Dr. DV K will be given two seperate tokens each day. One token will allow him to post a message containing the word 'cock', and the other one will allow him to post a message containing the word 'sucker'.
LOL. Just another normal day here on Dimitripunks. :) -- Mike Duvos $ PGP 2.6 Public Key available $ mpd@netcom.com $ via Finger. $
participants (6)
-
Adam Back -
dlv＠bwalk.dm.com -
mpd＠netcom.com -
ph＠netcom.com -
Timothy C. May -
Toto