Flexible rule-based infrastructure for discussion board maintenance

• US 7,720,853 B1
• Filed: 12/19/2006
• Issued: 05/18/2010
• Est. Priority Date: 12/19/2006
• Status: Active Grant

• Current Assignee: IMDb.com, Inc. (Amazon.com, Inc.)
• Original Assignee: IMDb.com, Inc. (Amazon.com, Inc.)
• Inventors: Siegel, Hilliard B., Needham, Colin J.
• Primary Examiner(s): Trujillo; James
• Assistant Examiner(s): Spieler; William
• Application Number:
  US11/613,140
• Time in Patent Office: 1,246 Days
• Field of Search: None
• US Class Current: 707/754
• CPC Class Codes: G06Q 10/10 Office automation; Time management
• CPC Class Codes: G06Q 50/01 Social networking
• CPC Class Codes: H04L 12/1822 Conducting the conference, e.g. admission, detection, selection or grouping of participants, correlating users to one or more conference sessions, prioritising transmission
• CPC Class Codes: H04L 51/212 using filtering or selective blocking

Abstract

Generally described, a method and system for providing a flexible rule-based infrastructure for a self-policing discussion board is provided. More specifically, a method and system is provided for processing reports for messages posted in a discussion board and determining whether each report is accurate based on predetermined criteria. The predetermined criteria are defined by a set of report handling rules which evolve over time by learning from previously processed activity reports. The set of report handling rules also defines an appropriate action to take with regards to an accused message as response to the report when the predetermined criteria are satisfied.

Claims

1. A computer system for analyzing a list of aggregated activity reports within a discussion board, each aggregated activity report comprising a plurality of activity reports, each activity report identifying a reporter user who submitted the activity report and identifying reported activity of an accused user, the computer system comprising:

one or more databases containing a set of report handling rules and a list of aggregated activity reports; and

a computing device in communication with the one or more databases, the computing device operative to;

select an activity report from the list of aggregated activity reports;

apply the set of report handling rules to the activity report to determine whether the activity report submitted by the identified reporter user is trusted based on a record of past activity reports identifying the same reporter user;

identify an action that is predefined to handle the activity report that is determined to be trusted and perform the identified action; and

generate log information about the activity report;

wherein the set of report handling rules are dynamically updated based on the log information.

2. The computer system of claim 1, wherein the identified action includes removing from the discussion board an accused message indicated in the activity report and deletes the activity report from the list of aggregated activity reports.

3. The computer system of claim 1, wherein the identified action includes editing an accused message indicated in the activity report and deletes the activity report from the list of aggregated activity reports.

4. The computer system of claim 1, wherein the identified action includes sending a warning message to in the activity report.

5. The computer system of claim 1, wherein the identified action includes suspending messages from being posted by the accused user identified in the activity report.

6. The computer system of claim 1, wherein the activity report includes an abuse category.

7. The computer system of claim 6, wherein the computing device is further operative to, based on the abuse category, identify an order in which to apply the set of report handling rules to the activity report.

8. The computer system of claim 1, wherein the computing device is further operative to determine whether the activity report is to be ignored if the activity report is not determined to be trusted.

9. The computer system of claim 8, wherein the computing device is further operative to delete the activity report from the list of activity reports if the activity report is determined to be ignored.

10. The computer system of claim 1, wherein the computing device is further operative to determine whether the activity report is to be reviewed by a human administrator if the activity report is not determined to be trusted.

11. The computer system of claim 10, wherein the computing device is further operative to add the activity report to a queue for human analysis if the activity report is to be reviewed by a human administrator.

12. The computer system of claim 1, wherein the log information and the activity report are stored in an activity report history which includes information about previously handled activity reports for which identified actions were performed and previously handled activity reports which were ignored.

13. The computer system of claim 12, wherein the computing device is further operative to select and reevaluate a subset of the previously handled activity reports.

14. The computer system of claim 13, wherein the computing device is further operative to, for each selected previously handled activity reports, perform a new action based on the reevaluation if the selected previously handled activity report was inaccurately processed.

15. The computer system of claim 14, wherein the new action includes restoring a deleted accused message of the selected previously handled activity report.

16. The computer system of claim 14, wherein the new action includes deleting an accused message of the selected previously handled activity report, which remains in the discussion board.

17. The computer system of claim 1, wherein the computing device is further operative to:

repeat the selection of an activity report, application of the set of report handling rules, identification of an action, and generation of log information for each activity report in the list of aggregated activity reports; and

wait to process further activity reports until a predetermined time is reached.

18. A computer-implemented method for managing a discussion board, the computer-implemented method comprising:

under control of instructions executed by one or more processors of a computer system;

receiving one or more activity reports;

invoking a report handling agent in order to process the one or more activity reports once a triggering number of activity reports has been received, the triggering number being greater than one;

obtaining results from the report handling agent; and

updating a discussion board and user profile information based on the results.

19. The computer-implemented method of claim 18 further comprising aggregating the received one or more activity reports into a first report list.

20. The computer-implemented method of claim 18, wherein the report handling agent obtains a set of report handling rules and applies the obtained set of report handing rules to the first report list.

21. The computer-implemented method of claim 20, wherein the set of report handing rules specifies criteria of a trusted report, an ignored report, and an indecisive report.

22. The computer-implemented method of claim 21 further comprising:

if an activity report matches the criteria of a trusted report, performing an appropriate action specified in the set of report handing rules and generating log information relating to the activity report.

23. The computer-implemented method of claim 22, wherein the appropriate action is at least one of deleting from the discussion board a message corresponding to the activity report, editing the message corresponding to the activity report, sending a notification to an accused user to remove the message corresponding to the activity report, or suspending the accused user'"'"'s activity within the discussion board.

24. The computer-implemented method of claim 21 further comprising:

if a report matches the criteria of an ignored report, deleting the activity report from the first report list and generating log information relating to the ignored report.

25. The computer-implemented method of claim 21 further comprising:

if a report matches the criteria of an indecisive report, generating log information.

26. The computer-implemented method of claim 21, wherein an analysis report is generated to identify problems within the set of report handling rules and criteria.

27. The computer-implemented method of claim 26 further comprising adding a new rule to the set of report handling rules in order to address the identified problems.

28. The computer-implemented method of claim 26 further comprising evaluating a reputation level of a user based on accuracy of the reports submitted by the reporter user.

29. The computer-implemented method of claim 28, wherein the user profile information is updated to reflect the reputation level of the user.

30. The computer-implemented method of claim 19 further comprising:

identifying, from the first report list, a set of activity reports which need further evaluation; and

moving the set of activity reports from the first report list into a second report list.