Kevint, I think you just described the new work credit system. Please search for tralala's post which has a good description of it.

Close but not exact.
no backdating.
If serious crunchers want to use optimized clients no problem, they would still see a boost in credits, however that "boost" would be limited and adjusted to be more equal to the other WU's. "weekend" crunchers who are only interested in the science or just want thier compputer to be doing "something" and don't care about credits would get no boost.

I think that those that are dedicated to the project for either credits or crunching should be awarded for such. Those that take the time out to optimize thier systems should be awarded for thier efforts.

---

SETI.USA

I'm not saying what anyone is going to do, we dont' have a batphone. I'm just saying the issue of 'backdating' was editing all scores based on the new system. The poster of this thread was suggesting another idea, my commenting on the idea doesn't mean it's likely to be implemented.

Ethan look at the titles under your name. They have a meaning. Given the past history anything yo say can be misconstrued. What the hell it will be misconstrued

You dont deserve that. You commitment to the project is known and is legendary .

I dont want to use my "I told you so Smilie "with you. But it may come to that.

Please take it as an advise form your favorite moderated target. :)

i have no problem with the optimized clients or people who use them, it was my personal choice not to. however i don't want or need to have my credits changed (for the past work i've done, or the future work) to reflect that. some others who don't use them might want them, not me.

what is needed is a fair and equitable plan that takes boinc and the optimizing out of the equation. that would be the only fair way to award credits based on work done, not how fast it's done.

by jose

Hey why dont we give credits by the percentage of time the computer is crunching for Rosetta only> The larger your Rosetta Share the larger the credits.

the only problem i can see with this is it will award more credits to a slow machine that crunches rosetta only, like my old sony P4 1.0. which i don't think if fair.

It is fair
Any computer running 100% rosetta should have a bonus to the point a Kentfield or a power mack running 100 % rosetta should have a huge credit bonus .

Are you kidding us? If you have no money, you're nothing. Is that what you think?

Congratulations. Again a new post to stress people.

Credits should reflect the work done, regardless with what machine.
More decoys crunched -> more work done -> more credits
Bigger decoys crunched -> more work done -> more credits

thiery - *scratches head* where did money come into it?!

---

So OK:

Jose,
why are you opposed to a fair view of the past?

Because ex post facto aplications of rules is not fair.

Lets not get into that again . For me the backdating issue is closed.

theirry!

would you please elaborate your last post, i don't understand it. a lot of what you quoted was by me, i would like to know what i posted that you reacted to.

---

Well. . I'm off to Starbucks and to take my golden retriever to the beach (he's been holding his leash for the last couple hours).

I'll leave it up to everyone to keep it civil, I haven't modded someone for (their) first time in awhile, so I think you know where the line is.

---

i have no problem with the optimized clients or people who use them, it was my personal choice not to. however i don't want or need to have my credits changed (for the past work i've done, or the future work) to reflect that. some others who don't use them might want them, not me.

what is needed is a fair and equitable plan that takes boinc and the optimizing out of the equation. that would be the only fair way to award credits based on work done, not how fast it's done.

by jose

Hey why dont we give credits by the percentage of time the computer is crunching for Rosetta only> The larger your Rosetta Share the larger the credits.

the only problem i can see with this is it will award more credits to a slow machine that crunches rosetta only, like my old sony P4 1.0. which i don't think if fair.

It is fair
Any computer running 100% rosetta should have a bonus to the point a Kentfield or a power mack running 100 % rosetta should have a huge credit bonus .

Are you kidding us? If you have no money, you're nothing. Is that what you think?

Congratulations. Again a new post to stress people.

No no... You can have a P3 or a cleron or a P2 or what ever running 100% Rosetta and you will get a bonus.

But if you invest money in hardware and then running 100% Rosetta the your bonus should be bigger. That is fair.

Boinc project credit equality is important. This post sums it up:

https://boinc.bakerlab.org/rosetta/forum_thread.php?id=2153#23688

Furthermore it will simply harm the project if we grant credits much higher than other projects. It will spoil the reputation of Rosetta and create great objections toward Rosetta among the BOINC community which can only bring the Teraflops down.

---

bring us all back some coffee! enjoy the walk

---

Well. . I'm off to Starbucks and to take my golden retriever to the beach (he's been holding his leash for the last couple hours).

I'll leave it up to everyone to keep it civil, I haven't modded someone for (their) first time in awhile, so I think you know where the line is.

Are you talking to me? :)
Go and enjoy your overprized coffee and your nice dog.

So OK:

Jose,
why are you opposed to a fair view of the past?

Because ax post facto aplications of rules is not fair.

Lets nit get into that again . For me the backdating issue is closed.

I just read your last posts regarding credits for dedicated crunchers, and with that view it's of course OK to leave it as it is.
Credits should not reflect the work done, but some kind of "dedication". So if I go to the scrapyard, buy some dozend 486/33 for $100, and let them crunch 24/7/365, I should get more credit then if I have only one P4/3600HT crunching on one virtual CPU Folding?
You must be kidding.

Boinc project credit equality is important. This post sums it up:

https://boinc.bakerlab.org/rosetta/forum_thread.php?id=2153#23688

Furthermore it will simply harm the project if we grant credits much higher than other projects. It will spoil the reputation of Rosetta and create great objections toward Rosetta among the BOINC community which can only bring the Teraflops down.

Intra project fairness is more important.

Backdating is not fair and the issue has been closed.

If serious crunchers want to use optimized clients no problem, they would still see a boost in credits, however that "boost" would be limited and adjusted to be more equal to the other WU's. "weekend" crunchers who are only interested in the science or just want thier compputer to be doing "something" and don't care about credits would get no boost.

Also -

i have no problem with the optimized clients or people who use them, it was my personal choice not to. however i don't want or need to have my credits changed (for the past work i've done, or the future work) to reflect that. some others who don't use them might want them, not me.

what is needed is a fair and equitable plan that takes boinc and the optimizing out of the equation. that would be the only fair way to award credits based on work done, not how fast it's done.

by jose

Hey why dont we give credits by the percentage of time the computer is crunching for Rosetta only> The larger your Rosetta Share the larger the credits.

Guess that makes me a weekend cruncher. I flit from one project to the other......

Perhaps I should discard all projects except one and install the very best optimized thingy I can find.

Hey, better still; why not go out and buy a PC for each project I want to be in.

The way this is going if I were Dev I`d be tempted once the new is fully tested to zero the flamin lot.

Jose is talking a type of proportional representation, which as Thierry points out depends a lot on money. I personally cannot agree to that, we have crunchers in our team with an RAC of 7 they are appreciated and get the same vote. There are even kids here crunching, how can they keep up?

This is voluntary based project not mercenary, people ARE ALREADY payed in credits for how much work they put in.

I cannot accept that the richer you are the more you get, this is against my whole principle as a being.

---

Not all Czech`s bounce but I`d like to try with Barbar ;-)

Make no mistake This IS the TEDDIES TEAM.

thiery - *scratches head* where did money come into it?!

Money come to it because, following Jose and the same he said yesterday, if you have Conroe, Kentsfield, .... means if you put money in the project you need more credits.
What about the M. x who has only one PC and don't run an optimized client. He is as so interested in the project, and as much involved than the guy who has 10 Conroe. He crunch 24/7. He finally got his 10.000 credits (if he not die before), and he hear "M. y has just bought 10 Conroe for the project. Congrats. He gets 1,000,000 credits bonus.
That's great!

Don't forget that M. x is 90% (if not more) of this project. Check the BOINC survey results to see how many people have more than one computer.

So OK:

Jose,
why are you opposed to a fair view of the past?

Because ax post facto aplications of rules is not fair.

Lets nit get into that again . For me the backdating issue is closed.

I just read your last posts regarding credits for dedicated crunchers, and with that view it's of course OK to leave it as it is.
Credits should not reflect the work done, but some kind of "dedication". So if I go to the scrapyard, buy some dozend 486/33 for $100, and let them crunch 24/7/365, I should get more credit then if I have only one P4/3600HT crunching on one virtual CPU Folding?
You must be kidding.

You should get a bonus for recycling the computers, getting them to work, and getting them to work for Rosetta 100% . YOu got 100 additional machines running. Your effort added 100 new soldiers to the Rosetta effort. It is that that matters. MOre people crunching

But in the same light: I get me 150 Xeons or 100 Conroes or 100 Power Macs Or 100 Kentfields and ad at least 4 Gig Memories and run 100% Rosetta , shoukld get huge additional credits cause their soldiers can do more work and when all is said and done they will do more work.

I am all for fairness a 100% Rosetta rig should be rewarded by Rosetta for their dedication to Rosetta, same thing for a 100% SETI in SETI, etc.

I should have included my stats in the previous post.
And also BTW I have only one PC.

To state it again, and imho as an absolut oposition, and completely different, to what Jose said:

Credit should be awarded according to the work done for the project.

AFAIK "work done" here is measured in crunched decoys of various size.
So:
More decoys -> more credit
bigger decoys -> more credit
more bigger decoys -> really more credit

This is absolutely independent of the matter someone is crunching. It's irrelevant if one has a slow cruncher 24/7 on Rosetta, or a 9x faster one 8/7 with 3 projects running. The asme amount of decoys -> the same amount of credits.