Posted by Larry Hoover on May 15, 2006, at 9:05:16
In reply to Re: trigger words, posted by Dr. Bob on May 15, 2006, at 7:57:00
> > Would it be possible to write a computer program that would search for trigger words, then instead of automatically marking the message with a flag, ask the writer if what they are writing could be a trigger?
>
> That was suggested before:
>
> http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/admin/20060317/msgs/622756.html
>
> And could be done. What words would be searched for?
>
> BobNo, not exactly the same as before. Midnight came up with a hybrid idea. I argued to reject the former proposal because it was to simply automatically flag or not flag, based on the presence of strings. That is no improvement over now, really, because the false positives would absolutely outweigh the benefits.
What makes her concept more intriguing is that it returns the decision to the author. The decision to flag has not yet been made. The author must decide if the post is a trigger or not. Moreover, you and your deputies would know whether the flagging issue itself had been considered by the poster. You would know if someone bypassed the feature. I think that is also an important datum.
What is better about this idea is it forces the author to consider their post from an angle that they simply may not have done on their own. It helps people to learn about what is involved in triggering, especially those who do not know what triggering even means.
The limit of this method is the catch file itself. I would think it would have to be huge, to anticipate the possible permutations of triggering language. That's where I wondered about the coding, if searching for strings all the time wouldn't significantly slow down the through-put of your servers.
Lar
poster:Larry Hoover
thread:614568
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/admin/20060412/msgs/644211.html