No, hits=-6.7 required=5.0
	tests=AWL,T_NONSENSE_FROM_99_100,X_LOOP,X_MAILING_LIST
	version=2.50-cvs

from localhost (jalapeno [127.0.0.1])
	by jmason.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DB3F816F03
	for <jm@localhost>; Wed,  2 Oct 2002 18:18:58 +0100 (IST)
from jalapeno [127.0.0.1]
	by localhost with IMAP (fetchmail-5.9.0)
	for jm@localhost (single-drop); Wed, 02 Oct 2002 18:18:58 +0100 (IST)
from xent.com ([64.161.22.236]) by dogma.slashnull.org
    (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id g92GuEK17987 for <jm@jmason.org>;
    Wed, 2 Oct 2002 17:56:14 +0100
from lair.xent.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by xent.com (Postfix)
    with ESMTP id 0E6C0294175; Wed,  2 Oct 2002 09:56:03 -0700 (PDT)
from hotmail.com (dav23.law15.hotmail.com [64.4.22.80]) by
    xent.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BDEC529409C for <fork@xent.com>;
    Wed,  2 Oct 2002 09:55:26 -0700 (PDT)
from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC;
    Wed, 2 Oct 2002 09:55:35 -0700
No, hits=-23.3 required=5.0
	tests=AWL,CLICK_BELOW,KNOWN_MAILING_LIST,QUOTED_EMAIL_TEXT,
	      REFERENCES,T_OUTLOOK_REPLY,T_QUOTE_TWICE_1
	version=2.50-cvs
From fork-admin@xent.com  Wed Oct  2 18:18:59 2002

----- Original Message -----
From: "Gary Lawrence Murphy" <garym@canada.com>
> ... and the one thing I think we've learned in all that time is that,
> as a help-desk, it doesn't work.
I'm not sure they are doing strictly help-desk stuff.
But the whole 'who in their right mind would use that? it doesn't have all
these cool features!' isn't always a guarantee of failure - maybe there is a
strength in this approach (agents and/or IM as ui) than can find a nich
application space.
>
> In all the prolog-based NL database query systems of the 1980's and
> other later chatterbot helpdesk projects like Shallow Red, even
> simpler tries like Ask Jeeves, people very quickly know they're
> talking to a robot, and the queries anneal to short, truncated and
> terse database-like verb-noun or just noun-keyword requests.
Kind of like a web query - and with google, someone else can turn them into
a link so you don't even have to type anything.
>
> People are just too quick to adapt, and too impatient to forgive a
> clunky interface, and for now, especially when the /average/ computer
> user still can't type more than maybe 5-10wpm, NL is a painfully slow
> clunky interface.
Yes - true true.
>
> Put it this way: Would you login, wake the bot and ask for the Seattle
> weather, or would you do as we /all/ do and just click the weather
> icon sitting there on your desktop?
What about a situation where you don't directly ask/talk to the bot, but
they listen in and advise/correct/interject/etc?
example: two people discussing trips, etc. may trigger a weather bot to
mention what the forecast says - without directly being asked.