From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Msuck: nntp://news.gmane.io/gmane.emacs.gnus.general/4959 Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Wes Hardaker Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.gnus.general Subject: Re: new feature for Red - adaptive scoring Date: Mon, 29 Jan 1996 08:53:06 -0800 Message-ID: <199601291653.AA282914387@teal.ece.ucdavis.edu> References: NNTP-Posting-Host: coloc-standby.netfonds.no X-Trace: main.gmane.org 1035145632 31359 80.91.224.250 (20 Oct 2002 20:27:12 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@main.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 20 Oct 2002 20:27:12 +0000 (UTC) Cc: ding@ifi.uio.no Return-Path: ding-request@ifi.uio.no Original-Received: from ifi.uio.no (ifi.uio.no [129.240.64.2]) by miranova.com (8.7.3/8.6.9) with SMTP id LAA26921 for ; Mon, 29 Jan 1996 11:10:36 -0800 Original-Received: from teal.ece.ucdavis.edu (hardaker@teal.ece.ucdavis.edu [128.120.54.142]) by ifi.uio.no with ESMTP (8.6.11/ifi2.4) id ; Mon, 29 Jan 1996 17:53:10 +0100 Original-Received: by teal.ece.ucdavis.edu (1.37.109.16/Ultrix3.0-C/eecs 1.1) id AA282914387; Mon, 29 Jan 1996 08:53:07 -0800 Original-To: larsi@ifi.uio.no (Lars Magne Ingebrigtsen) X-Face: #qW^}a%m*T^{A:Cp}$R\"38+d}41-Z}uU8,r%F#c#s:~Nzp0G9](s?,K49KJ]s"*7g vRgASrAvQc4@/}L7Qc=w{)]ACO\R{LF@S{pXfojjjGg6c;q6{~C}CxC^^&~(F]`1W)%9j/iS/I M",B1M.?{w8ckLTYD'`|kTr\i\cgY)P4 X-Url: http://www.ece.ucdavis.edu/~hardaker In-Reply-To: Your message of "27 Jan 1996 21:33:07 PST." Xref: main.gmane.org gmane.emacs.gnus.general:4959 X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.gnus.general:4959 larsi@ifi.uio.no (Lars Magne Ingebrigtsen) writes: |> Score rules that haven't been used for 7 days (or so) are removed, so |> that shouldn't really be a problem, I would think... The point of the |> decay thing is to avoid having all the things you like reach posinf |> while the things you don't like would reach neginf, isn't it? True, however in some cases you want to come close. Take for instance, really annoying threads that have gone on way too long you actually want to make sure that it makes it below the 'mark' or 'expunge' values. This will become increasingly hard to do if you have a percentile based system. The other problem is that it greatly depends on the frequency with which you use gnus. For instance, if you read gnus 2-3 times a day, then every time you load the score file your scores drop by a percentage. Now, since very few articles will get posted during that time, your scores will be aftected drasticlaly. Then there is the guy that reads articles gnus once in a blue moon. He'll barely decrease his scores upon load and then read, say, 100 articles with the same subject which will greatly increase the score for that subject. The guy that read the gnus 3 times a day probably entered the group and had no articles with the subject in question, and thereby only decreased his score. I've certainly rambled about this far long enough for even the most basic of infants could understand my thoughts... err, I could have written this so incoherently that no-one will understand it either I suppose. Wow. Monday mornings. Anyway, I like the suggestion at the end of the week about have a variable that is a list contains the rules to use and when. IE, if abs(score) < 50 then decrease by 5 pts if abs(score) >= 50 then decrease by 5% or something of that nature.