Data processing: database and file management or data structures – Database design – Data structure types
Reexamination Certificate
2000-02-14
2003-06-24
Robinson, Greta (Department: 2177)
Data processing: database and file management or data structures
Database design
Data structure types
C707S793000, C707S793000
Reexamination Certificate
active
06584471
ABSTRACT:
FIELD OF THE INVENTION
The present invention relates to the field of information receipt, organization, presentation, and retrieval, and more particularly to an information database and system that sorts and re-sorts information in virtual real time based upon democratic criteria, allowing members to provide information, designate and weight the designations of that information, while the system tracks and modifies the display of that information in accordance with the weighted sums of such designations. The invention further relates to automatic, dynamic profiling of members in a manner suggestive of profile similarities and intellectual matching among them.
BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION
The Internet is filled with information in a generally disorganized and flat format. Information presentation is based either upon the principals of anarchy, i.e., the “absence of government,” or autocracy, i.e., “unchecked by constitutional restrictions or limitations.” See
Black's Law Dictionary
, 4
th
Edition, 1968.
For example, entities can allow their information to be accessible, but organization is dictated predominantly by location, such as by way of a Uniform Resource Locator or “URL.” This is an example of content anarchy, in which all content is equally weighted and anything can be presented in virtually any format. All such presentations remain at the same level, with no hierarchical structure between them. In general, there are no specialized rules for organization of information across multiple URL's that are owned by independent entities. Any individual entity can present anything at any time, in virtually any format.
Each URL tags to a specific server or group of servers, with its own predefined organizational structure. Within the constraints of a particular location in which users can access and exchange information, lie a precept- of rules that the particular location imposes in advance of the exchange. For example, if one “dials in” to a chat room, the subject and rights of access and disclosure are already predefined. One can establish a new chat room, but there is limited ability to poll the general audience and objectively determine commonality for the purposes of establishing the proper subject. Accordingly, such systems are content autocratic.
More specifically, the subject, format and ultimately the very existence of a given site is determined either by its owner, originator or editorial administrators. The same people determine site structure, administer the site and make all the important decisions concerning the operation of the site. While such decisions may comport with popular opinion, this outcome is not by design but by mere happenstance.
A traditional example of an autocratic environment is a bulletin board. The particular categories and subcategories are predetermined by the creators or administrators of the site, and the individuals who log on can subjectively provide content which is presented in flat form. Under the original bulletin board concept, there was no mechanism for objectively determining among the users commonality between the postings. The postings were merely placed, and searching by word between them provided. The bulletin board concept has evolved to the extent of permitting the designation of categories by the individual users and threads within categories. Still, however, there is no mechanism for objectively recreating and automatically re-sorting the categories for posting based upon interest. Thus, the bulletin board, in both its original and expanded form, remains a mix of autocratic (i.e., the categories are predefined) and anarchic (i.e., the information is flat in the category) information.
It should be appreciated that in an environment in which anyone can open a category or posting on any topic, may appear, at first blush, to resemble a free, democratic environment. However, the interest that others have in the category is in no manner considered in determining whether to maintain that category. This has many negative consequences. It is common for users to find chat rooms with either no one or a handful of participants, and bulletin board categories with few to no listings, or full of postings unrelated to the board's stated category. Worse yet, many boards are filled with junk content and advertising. Yet these chat rooms and categories remain because the structure of the environment allows them to be created and maintained, even though there is little to no interest in them, and their existence interferes with the meaningful organization and operation of other, more popular boards. Such environments demonstrate true content anarchy.
Allowing the webmaster of the site to edit the contents and thereby remove categories or chat rooms that the webmaster, in his/her view, believes to be unpopular, offensive or irrelevant, or, in the alternative, add categories or rooms that the webmaster believes to have interest and appeal, now imposes the autocratic rule of the webmaster on the system.
It should thus be appreciated that heretofore unknown is a mechanism by which information can be created and maintained in categories that truly reflect the democratic interests of the users. To allow the users to subjectively render determinations would send the site back to the anarchic; to predetermine based-upon editorial decisions would send the site back to the autocratic.
Examples of traditional autocratic and anarchic sites abound. For example, “theglobe.com” is a traditional bulletin board design in which the categories are predetermined, and postings are permitted, even though certain of such postings are infrequently to never viewed, are filled with junk, or are unrelated to their stated purpose. “Ezboards.com” differs from “globe.com” mainly in the ease of its interface and ability to create categories, but otherwise suffers the same disabilities.
“Vote.com”, “voter.com” and “speakout.com” poll audience responses to predetermined categories and predetermined questions. These sites, however, do not invoke an automatic and objective, democratic hierarchy. Similarly, while “remarq.com” includes a rating system, in which scores are “assigned,” this system is clearly not objective, nor are the categories created and maintained based upon the objective, hierarchical interests of the users.
The Internet thus presently lacks in true abilities to create collaborative information environments, or so-called “content democracies.” (The phrase “Content Democracy” is a trademark of the inventors. All use is by permission only)
Likewise, the Internet lacks in the ability to perform objective dynamic profiling. In other words, typical “matchmaking” engines and site profiling procedures require the subjective self-revelation of the participants—they are compelled to answer “pre-canned” questionnaires and describe themselves in the manner they wish to be, rather than in the manner that they actual are. Consequently, if the questions don't elicit a true profile, then the results are useless. Likewise, if the questions are not honestly answered, then the results are misleading. Additionally, by requiring the provision of answers to such questionnaires, a whole category of non-participating users is lost—i.e., those who elect not to answer the questionnaire are simply left unprofiled or are denied access to the site.
It is thus an object of the instant invention to provide an environment in which both categories and subcategories of information are ranked based upon objective indicia rather than subjective determinations of the autocrats (i.e., the founders or editorial boards) or anarchists (i.e., the users who can “throw up” anything they want).
It is a further object of the instant invention to provide a system that automatically and objectively ranks in hierarchy information that is provided in a manner that correlates with the actual interests of the participants of the site.
It is a still further object of the instant invention to provide dynamic profiling of participants by automatically tracking behavior in the site, and then a
Greyserman Alexander
Maclin Leon
Black Linh
Robinson Greta
Stein Mitchell A.
Stein Law, P.C.
LandOfFree
System and method for the adaptive, hierarchical receipt,... does not yet have a rating. At this time, there are no reviews or comments for this patent.
If you have personal experience with System and method for the adaptive, hierarchical receipt,..., we encourage you to share that experience with our LandOfFree.com community. Your opinion is very important and System and method for the adaptive, hierarchical receipt,... will most certainly appreciate the feedback.
Profile ID: LFUS-PAI-O-3099223