Craig R.Hughes wrote:
>
> On Thursday, August 8, 2002, at 11:15  AM, Mika Hirvonen wrote:
>
>> I do not know the algorithms used to calculate confidence values, but it
>> probably penalizes heavily when someone revokes spam that everyone else
>> considers as spam. Or at least it should.
>
>
> The problem with that is that invariably, there are "gray" mails.  Some
> people will vote "spam", others will vote "nonspam" -- under your
> proposed system, anyone who ever calls "gray" mail nonspam will have a
> shitty trust score.  And once you have a shitty trust score, your own
> submissions won't even be used to flag your own spam as spam.  That's
> bound to confuse a lot of people.  "But I just marked that exact message
> as spam.  Why is it not being considered spam?  I'm an honest submitter."
I assume that how much the trust goes down depends of the proportion of
report vs revoke. If everybody except one says that a mail is spam, the
one guy will see his trust go down dramatically. If you are with the
majority, your trust goes up. If you are against the majority, your
trust goes down. If people 50-50, whatever you vote, your neither
against the majority nor with it, so your trust won't change. So your
"gray" mail won't have much influence on your trust (neither good nor
bad, just... gray)
-------------------------------------------------------
This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek
Welcome to geek heaven.
http://thinkgeek.com/sf
_______________________________________________
Razor-users mailing list
Razor-users@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/razor-users

from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by phobos.labs.netnoteinc.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 04276440D4
	for <jm@localhost>; Fri,  9 Aug 2002 10:33:59 -0400 (EDT)
from phobos [127.0.0.1]
	by localhost with IMAP (fetchmail-5.9.0)
	for jm@localhost (single-drop); Fri, 09 Aug 2002 15:33:59 +0100 (IST)
from webnote.net (mail.webnote.net [193.120.211.219]) by
    dogma.slashnull.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id g79ESQb07239 for
    <jm-razor@jmason.org>; Fri, 9 Aug 2002 15:28:26 +0100
from usw-sf-list2.sourceforge.net (usw-sf-fw2.sourceforge.net
    [216.136.171.252]) by webnote.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id BAA02392 for
    <jm-razor@jmason.org>; Fri, 9 Aug 2002 01:33:10 +0100
from usw-sf-list1-b.sourceforge.net ([10.3.1.13]
    helo=usw-sf-list1.sourceforge.net) by usw-sf-list2.sourceforge.net with
    esmtp (Exim 3.31-VA-mm2 #1 (Debian)) id 17cxcN-0007gy-00; Thu,
    08 Aug 2002 17:27:03 -0700
from main.gmane.org ([80.91.224.249]) by
    usw-sf-list1.sourceforge.net with esmtp (Exim 3.31-VA-mm2 #1 (Debian)) id
    17cxbQ-0005Sq-00 for <razor-users@lists.sourceforge.net>; Thu,
    08 Aug 2002 17:26:05 -0700
from list by main.gmane.org with local (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian))
    id 17cxaY-0002Zi-00 for <razor-users@lists.sourceforge.net>;
    Fri, 09 Aug 2002 02:25:10 +0200
from news by main.gmane.org with local (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian))
    id 17cxaY-0002Za-00 for <gmane-mail-spam-razor-user@m.gmane.org>;
    Fri, 09 Aug 2002 02:25:10 +0200
From razor-users-admin@lists.sourceforge.net  Fri Aug  9 15:36:19 2002