Hodlbod, I recognize your concerns about maintaining “webs of trust”, and for most people this just “needs to work” without maintenance.
However, I don’t see a realistic (usable and trusted) WoT solution without an affordance for the end user to be the final arbiter in every instance of “is this a trusted follow”.
I imagine something like an “is_trusted” flag could be added to kind3 p tags… (after petname) AND that WoT lists COULD be determined algorithmically without this flag being set. Having the flag set “true” simply would override the WoT algo on a case by case… they could even feed back to the users own WoT algo as a “bump up” for a follow that “is_trusted” by one of the users “is_trusted” follows.
Login to reply
Replies (1)
WoT is a heuristic, it doesn't need to be exhaustive. One way to state the goal is to remove 98% of what the user doesn't want to see, and produce recommendations that are more than 10% likely to be relevant. Implicit web of trust is enough for that. Explicit additions may be a useful addition, but probably won't ever result in more than a 1% improvement (still huge) over either metric above.