Re: [Asrg] Computer Security Communication Network

[Adam Sobieski <[e-mail]>]

Internet Research Task Force,
Anti-Spam Research Group,
John Levine,

Some techniques for annotating message or system objects include tallying booleans, annotations from a list, or typed hyperlinks from users.  In peer-to-peer systems, during search processes, tallied annotations on objects can adorn search result items.  Some social networking websites utilize thumbs up or likes.  In Digg-based or Reddit-based systems, tallied annotations are utilized in sorting search results.

Extending on those premises, towards the aforementioned more complex voting systems, or more complex annotational systems, a specific example includes that, beyond a button per message or system object, for indicating whether a message or system object is spam or not, or beyond a button pair, we can envision a forms-based process with an initial user interface item of a drop-down menu of spam or other annotational categories.  Such a drop-down menu could suffice for either annotations from a list or typed hyperlinks.

Beyond that user interface, however, each category from that drop-down menu could have its own form to complete, where, in each such form, users could indicate one or more text or hypertext selections.  At the end of each such form, there could be a navigational option to either return to the aforementioned drop-down menu to add another such annotative object or to complete the forms-based user interaction.

In the indicated example, the selections of text or hypertext, along with categorized annotations, resemble granular and machine-utilizable evidence and observations and users would then have more to either agree or disagree with one another about than with tallied booleans, tallied annotations from a list, or tallied typed hyperlinks.



Kind regards,

Adam Sobieski