We don't bite newbies here... much | |
PerlMonks |
comment on |
( [id://3333]=superdoc: print w/replies, xml ) | Need Help?? |
To be frank, no liguistic analysis solution would be MEANINGFUL and HELPFUL in this case, doesn't matter whether we have a good liguistic analysis solution.
Think about this at a higher level, and don't sink into technical details too quick. This is actually a good example where TECHNOLOGY does not help with SOCIAL issues. Think about this, whatever how prefect the analysis tool is, it would require a big amount of input to yield any MEANINGFUIL result. The reality is that, if Slinker behaves in the same way as Stinker, doesn't matter whether they are one person, most likely, long before your tool give you any MEANINGFUL result to JUSTIFY your decision, you have banned Slinker already. On the other hand, if Slinker behaves better, even your nice liguistic analysis tool figures out that Slinker is Stincker, there is still no JUSTIFIED reason for you to ban him. In this case, the only thing a technically capable tool does is, to create negative social feeling. Summary:
In reply to Re: Text Analysis Tools to compare Slinker and Stinker?
by pg
|
|