Posted by so on June 26, 2005, at 10:54:20
In reply to Re: Automated Civility Checker » so, posted by gabbii on June 26, 2005, at 7:33:23
> I think it would really annoy me.
> I mean, it couldn't tell if you were referring to an outside situation, or to something someone said in your personal life, and not directing the comment toward a poster could it?
>
> For example, saying "it's causing a stir because it's so offensive" (referring to say, a situation in the news) would probably be considered "uncivil" wouldn't it?Algorithms could eventually be designed to detect context - it's mostly a matter of processor time required to check context, especially of nouns and of prepositional phrases. Of course, English does allow considerable ambiguity in the meaning of words and usage. English is a loose language and most average English writers don't write with sufficient precision to satisfy even the grammar checkers now available.
An algorithm could be written to check compliance with terms of service, if they were specific. If it were a tool available for voluntary use, and not the last word, it could be useful for people trying to comply with exceptionally unique terms of service such as those implemented on at least one mental health mutual support site. The problem I foresee arises with one individual defining their local terms of service as "civility." I doubt any machine can correct cognitive disonnance introduced in the minds of a community by a powerful individual's decision to impose their own definition for a word so descriptive of basic human behavior.
poster:so
thread:518792
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/admin/20050614/msgs/519198.html