Just me, mk, but...
Whilst I can filter useless, spammy feeds on Hubski and even when I do stumble across them can instantly recognise their lack by the lack of updots, the Hose neither filters nor does it distinguish for its followers between content, style, age or worth of any content.
So to the uninitiated, this list looks like a regular and equally valued set of posts from Hubski:
If it were me, I'd skip adding posts to the Hose from members who have been registered for less than 24 hours.
Actually, if it were me, I'd selfishly add a new feature which would let me filter posts that had been mutually filtered by any more than X of the people I already follow (and therefore trust). An extra checkbox: community filter. A database and logic hit building the feed? Community filtering a slippery slope?
And curate the Hose in a similar manner. More tricky, that, though, and more likely to attract accusations of censorship or provide opportunities for abuse maybe.
Right now, I toss them into globally filtered as I see them, but I am not always vigilant. Once in globally filtered, they are removed from the hose. There is, however, an option to see globally filtered posts in settings. Perhaps I should start following #spam. We aren't going to be able to get away with this approach forever.
Interesting. My 'show globally filtered' was 'Off'. I set it to 'On'. I don't notice any difference in anything. I'm not sure if Off removes globally filtered things from my feed or allows them. I'm not sure how things become globally filtered. (Just via you?) I guess it's two issues, really. One being a way to deal with clearly worthless spam (easily community flagged and automated after flagging passes a threshold) and the other being an idle extension of that idea to outsource the curation of an individual's more on topic feed to a selected set of trusted peers. The latter is a pipe dream but a fun one. I'd miss nothing three or more of the people I follow had flagged as worthless-despite-not-being-spam.