[freenet-dev] Adding the AFKIndex

[Robert Hailey]

On Mar 19, 2008, at 1:56 PM, Matthew Toseland wrote:

> Should we include the AFKIndex? It is a good thing to have as many  
> indexes as
> possible, and our policy is and has always been to link to indexes  
> purely
> according to their value for finding content.
>
> However, the AFK index is an auto-generated index *with  
> activelinks*. Sites
> are apparently automatically added to the uncategorised section. The  
> site
> owner claims he will remove child porn sites, however near the top  
> of the
> uncategorised section, we have what appears to be a child porn  
> site ... with
> an activelink (!!). All our other indexes except Another Index  
> manually add
> sites and don't link to CP at all.
>
> Advice?
>
> USK at 2L-k2U32b3yIl2~YjBU7-- 
> QJPTtixSwHZxYOuGjS3A0 
> ,QJBd6zpJgEsijJGQNNcwUhsrW5vJ8VtlmNX5ka2~dlU,AQACAAE/AFKindex/4/


Ascetically, it's a *very* nice interface. Gives more useful  
information than the activelink index & anotherindex, too.

Seeing that there is reason to believe that this particular entry has  
not been patrolled yet, I see little cause for it being cause for  
rejection. In fact, given the nature of freenet, there is no guarantee  
that child porn may not later appear in *any* of the indexes presently  
included in the defaults. The best we could expect is for it to be  
rejected later if found to be undesirable.

For an index the downside I see is how many are uncatagorized, but  
making it a default bookmark may encourage the author to categorize  
and maintain it more effectively.

Perhaps we could suggest to the author that unpatrolled entries not  
have activelinks?

--
Robert Hailey