From razor-users-admin@lists.sourceforge.net  Fri Aug  9 15:41:12 2002
Return-Path: <razor-users-admin@example.sourceforge.net>
Delivered-To: yyyy@localhost.netnoteinc.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by phobos.labs.netnoteinc.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 854EC44104
	for <jm@localhost>; Fri,  9 Aug 2002 10:34:43 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from phobos [127.0.0.1]
	by localhost with IMAP (fetchmail-5.9.0)
	for jm@localhost (single-drop); Fri, 09 Aug 2002 15:34:43 +0100 (IST)
Received: from webnote.net (mail.webnote.net [193.120.211.219]) by
    dogma.slashnull.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id g79EYjb08152 for
    <jm-razor@jmason.org>; Fri, 9 Aug 2002 15:34:45 +0100
Received: 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 WAA01364 for
    <jm-razor@jmason.org>; Thu, 8 Aug 2002 22:36:05 +0100
Received: 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 17cur4-0008VS-00; Thu,
    08 Aug 2002 14:30:02 -0700
Received: from h-66-166-21-186.snvacaid.covad.net ([66.166.21.186]
    helo=rover.vipul.net) by usw-sf-list1.sourceforge.net with esmtp (Exim
    3.31-VA-mm2 #1 (Debian)) id 17cuq7-00063H-00 for
    <razor-users@lists.sourceforge.net>; Thu, 08 Aug 2002 14:29:03 -0700
Received: (from vipul@localhost) by rover.vipul.net (8.11.6/8.11.6) id
    g78LT0B05328; Thu, 8 Aug 2002 14:29:00 -0700
From: Vipul Ved Prakash <mail@vipul.net>
To: "Craig R . Hughes" <craig@deersoft.com>
Cc: razor-users@example.sourceforge.net
Subject: Re: [Razor-users] What's wrong with the Razor servers now?
Message-Id: <20020808142859.A4489@rover.vipul.net>
Reply-To: mail@vipul.net
Mail-Followup-To: "Craig R . Hughes" <craig@deersoft.com>,
	razor-users@lists.sourceforge.net
References: <007001c23ef4$25af8f40$6600a8c0@dhiggins>
    <BB00AA31-AB0A-11D6-BCF2-00039396ECF2@deersoft.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5i
In-Reply-To: <BB00AA31-AB0A-11D6-BCF2-00039396ECF2@deersoft.com>;
    from craig@deersoft.com on Thu, Aug 08, 2002 at 01:09:22PM -0700
X-Operating-System: Linux rover.vipul.net 2.4.18
X-Privacy: If possible, encrypt your reply.  Key at http://vipul.net/
Sender: razor-users-admin@example.sourceforge.net
Errors-To: razor-users-admin@example.sourceforge.net
X-Beenthere: razor-users@example.sourceforge.net
X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.9-sf.net
Precedence: bulk
List-Help: <mailto:razor-users-request@example.sourceforge.net?subject=help>
List-Post: <mailto:razor-users@example.sourceforge.net>
List-Subscribe: <https://example.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/razor-users>,
    <mailto:razor-users-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=subscribe>
List-Id: <razor-users.example.sourceforge.net>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://example.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/razor-users>,
    <mailto:razor-users-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.geocrawler.com/redir-sf.php3?list=razor-users>
X-Original-Date: Thu, 8 Aug 2002 14:28:59 -0700
Date: Thu, 8 Aug 2002 14:28:59 -0700

Craig, 

For the most part, 99% times 99% users agree on what is spam. This is the
nature of the spam problem. Now if you were to use a "personal trust"
system, you'd have a huge personal trust group that would include 99% of
the userbase. This means 99% times you'd be coming to the same conclusion,
only after burning several orders of magnitude more CPU cycles. That would
be stupid. Also, it would take several orders of magnitude longer to
bootstrap and reach effectiveness. Sub-optimal in the extreme.

As regards to the problems with the "gray" areas you mentioned, servers
recognize such content, and razor-agents can use this information to make
individual determination. Not to mention, users can set a local confidence
level they are confortable with.

cheers,
vipul.

On Thu, Aug 08, 2002 at 01:09:22PM -0700, Craig R . Hughes wrote:
> By system-trust vs personal trust I don't mean that the system doesn't
> have a trust rating for each user, but rather that each individual has
> one system-wide trust rating. Your trust rating for scoring my mail is
> the same as your trust rating for scoring your own email, or Joe
> Schmoe's email. You may be great at flagging most spam, but just really
> bad at flagging one particular piece of controversial mail which is
> "gray spam" -- ie some people love it, others hate it. Ideally, I should
> have my own personal trust score for you which agrees with my beliefs
> about that controversial mail, rather than the system-wide beliefs. If
> that doesn't happen, then depending on the trust system's weightings,
> there are 3 possibilities:
>
> 1. All "gray" mail is blocked as spam (ie lots of false positives for
>    individual users)
> 2. All "gray" mail is allowed through as nonspam (ie lots of false
>    negatives for individuals)
> 3. The entire trust system collapses because noone is trusted due to
>    conflicting votes about "gray" spam.

-- 

Vipul Ved Prakash          |   "The future is here, it's just not 
Software Design Artist     |    widely distributed."
http://vipul.net/          |              -- William Gibson



-------------------------------------------------------
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


