From: frantz@netcom.com (Bill Frantz)
Date: Sun, 28 Jan 1996 10:15:39 +0800
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Subject: Re: This post is rated LTC for `Low Technical Content'
Message-ID: <199601280200.SAA24044@netcom6.netcom.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


At  7:55 PM 1/27/96 -0500, JMKELSEY@delphi.com wrote:
>The best solution has always seemed to me to be one of these three:
>
>a.   Tags appended to notes/posts, from various reviewers, digitally
>signed and otherwise coded to allow intelligent filtering, or
>
>b.   Electronic distributions of reviewers' evaluations tagged to
>notes in some simple way.  (I.e. give each note or post a unique ID
>which appears in the message.)  Then, a smart newsreader/mail
>program sorts the notes accordingly, or
>
>c.   The reviewer reads the group/list, and rates posts according to
>some useful criteria.  He then resends it out to his users, filtered
>as desired.  (CP-LITE seems like a very early version of this.)

d. The "V-Chip" device makes a network query to the selected rating service
to ask for a rating.  What happen when the rating service is unreachable is
just one of the many parameters that the parent needs to set.  (If designed
right, no parent could use it, but its availability would still stop the
adult censorship croud in congress.)

This approach as the advantage that the communications costs accrue to
those using the feature and not to everyone else.  A disadvantage is that
each content item needs some ID.

Bill