Re^2: Collaborative filtertering

Good Direction:
Person could have voted 1000's of nodes just because he/she has extra votes remaining for the day or just liked the node in general rather than specific. IMHO, for practical purpose we cannot use the existing voting system. There is no capabilities in the existing system to vote negative after you have vote positive for the node and vice versa.

Comment on Re^2: Collaborative filtertering

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^3: Collaborative filtertering by eric256 (Parson) on Aug 23, 2004 at 15:21 UTC
Well it wouldn't be perfect, as the voting system now is not. With enough people voting though you would be looking at rough averages much more than the actual individuals. The idea is to spread the factors out enough that its only if most the people who agree with you most the time like it. That way individual ++/-- mean less and less, its the overall trend of you group of "friends" that decide about nodes you might like. ___________ Eric Hodges	[reply]

Replies are listed 'Best First'.

Re^3: Collaborative filtertering
by eric256 (Parson) on Aug 23, 2004 at 15:21 UTC

Well it wouldn't be perfect, as the voting system now is not. With enough people voting though you would be looking at rough averages much more than the actual individuals. The idea is to spread the factors out enough that its only if most the people who agree with you most the time like it. That way individual ++/-- mean less and less, its the overall trend of you group of "friends" that decide about nodes you might like.

___________
Eric Hodges

[reply]