Virtual Space Comment Mute History for Harassment Restriction
Find Innovative SolutionsGenerate Solutions
Solution Overview
Problem
Conventional systems fail to efficiently restrict harassment without impeding free interaction and communication, as malicious users can repeatedly post unsolicited content, and blanket restrictions hinder user comments, or maliciously frame users by making them invisible.
Innovation Solution
A method and system that allow users to designate specific users as restriction targets based on a restriction history, updating a mute history, and restricting actions from users who meet certain conditions, including a predetermined ratio and period, while allowing exceptions for special users and varying criteria based on cancellation history.
Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles
Engineering Contradiction Analysis
1Object-affected harmful factors
If a user designates to hide comments from another user in a group, then the comments are hidden from the designating user, but malicious users can repeatedly post unsolicited content and blanket restrictions may hinder free interaction
Solution Approach 1:
The system segments the restriction mechanism into individual user designations rather than blanket restrictions. Each user can independently designate specific users whose comments they wish to hide, creating personalized restriction lists. This segmentation allows the system to block harassment targeting specific users while preserving free interaction for all other user pairs in the group.
Solution Approach 2:
The restriction mechanism applies local quality by making restrictions user-specific and context-dependent. Instead of applying a uniform restriction policy to all users, the system allows each user to customize their own restriction list based on their individual experiences with harassment. This local approach ensures that restrictions are applied only where needed (for specific harassing users) while maintaining open communication channels for all other users.
2Object-affected harmful factors
If accepting a designation from any user to make comments invisible for all users in the group, then harassment is restricted, but the designated user's right to post comments is deprived or excessive restriction hinders free interaction
Solution Approach 1:
The system inverts the conventional restriction approach by making the designating user (the one experiencing harassment) the controller rather than the designated user (the one being restricted). Instead of the designated user losing control over their comments, the system empowers the designating user to control what they wish to hide. This inversion protects the designated user's rights while still enabling harassment restriction through the designating user's autonomous choice.
Solution Approach 2:
The system implements self-service by allowing users to autonomously manage their own restriction preferences without requiring intervention from the designated user or system administrators. Each user independently decides whom to restrict and can modify their restriction list at any time. This self-service mechanism ensures that user rights are protected while enabling flexible harassment restriction based on individual user needs.
3Object-affected harmful factors
If designating a specific user as a restriction target and updating restriction history, then nuisance actions are restricted, but the system complexity increases with multiple criteria and cancellation history
Solution Approach 1:
The system applies preliminary action by automatically updating the restriction history whenever a user designates another user for restriction. This automatic tracking of restriction patterns allows the system to identify users who repeatedly post nuisance content without requiring manual analysis or complex algorithms. The preliminary accumulation of restriction data enables future automated decisions while keeping the current system structure relatively simple.
Solution Approach 2:
The system implements feedback mechanisms where restriction history and cancellation history continuously inform the restriction decision-making process. When a user designates another for restriction, this action is recorded and fed back into the system, influencing future restriction decisions. The feedback loop allows the system to adapt to changing user behaviors and restriction patterns while maintaining a manageable level of complexity through straightforward cause-and-effect relationships.
Data Source
AI summary
When a user performs an operation on their user terminal to designate another user as a mute target, then the distribution server receives mute designation information transmitted from the user terminal. Then, the mute received history is updated for the designated other user. If a comment is posted from a user who is one of a plurality of users participating in the virtual space of the same content and who meets the restriction condition based on the mute received history, and for whom a full mute flag is are set to ON, the posting user is considered to be a user who tends to make nuisance comments, and the reflection of the comment from the posting user is restricted on the user terminals of a plurality of users participating in the virtual space, including a user who has not designated the user as a mute target.