and that was only a suggestion!

instead of focusing on the negative of that inequality, why don't you start posting ways of keeping it fair? and i mean all of you! get back to the original solution mentioned or come up with your own.

there, that should kill the thread for a minute or two

---

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.

Carl,
The history will retain that we agreed on one point :-)

Intra project fairness is more important.

Backdating is not fair and the issue has been closed.

The issue has been closed - I agree. However that can't mean than any discussion about the idea of backdating should be deleted as long as it is done without insult and accusations.

---

and that was only a suggestion!

instead of focusing on the negative of that inequality, why don't you start posting ways of keeping it fair? and i mean all of you! get back to the original solution mentioned or come up with your own.

there, that should kill the thread for a minute or two

It's impossible. Each time we try to discuss a subject, agreed or not, he drives us in another direction. And we are called trolls!

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.

You are misreading me...

a 100% machine regardless of its size should be recognized. But man, if a person has the money tobuy 100 conroes and run them here more power to them... that means there is a lot of extra work that is going tobe done.

Thierry I hope you are nit saying you want all the Kentfields and Conroes and Powr Macs and Xeons and the high end optys leave this project becasue a person running a slow P4 ( one like me)may feel insignificant?

People a reference in other threads has been made to my credits. I have a slow P4 that I call sloth for a reason. Not only slot is low...it was from the begining a magnet for corrupted wus and no credit....There are people here that can recall my cries everytime Sloth Crashed. :)

If I have the credits I have it was because I helped test a water cooled opty system.. So perish the thought I have a huge farm or a huge computer. The only huge thing in my house is me.

Did I feel bad my slotth cannot match the power macs, conroes and kentfield Here?
Hell no!! I felt priviledge my sloth is there with computers of every type crunching. That I wasa part, albeit a small part of this project.

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

In the example you give you should be rewarded with a bonus in each project in the proportion of your participation in that project when compared to your DC totals.

Intra project fairness is more important.

Backdating is not fair and the issue has been closed.

The issue has been closed - I agree. However that can't mean than any discussion about the idea of backdating should be deleted as long as it is done without insult and accusations.

As the issue has been closed ...any discussion of backdating is flame bait

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.

The only proportion that really interst me is proportion to Rosetta.

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.

Dedication in terms of time commited to te project in proportion to the other projects should be rewarded aslo.

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.

You are misreading me...

a 100% machine regardless of its size should be recognized. But man, if a person has the money tobuy 100 conroes and run them here more power to them... that means there is a lot of extra work that is going tobe done.


Thierry I hope you are nit saying you want all the Kentfields and Conroes and Powr Macs and Xeons and the high end optys leave this project becasue a person running a slow P4 ( one like me)may feel insignificant?

People a reference in other threads has been made to my credits. I have a slow P4 that I call sloth for a reason. Not only slot is low...it was from the begining a magnet for corrupted wus and no credit....There are people here that can recall my cries everytime Sloth Crashed. :)

If I have the credits I have it was because I helped test a water cooled opty system.. So perish the thought I have a huge farm or a huge computer. The only huge thing in my house is me.

Did I feel bad my slotth cannot match the power macs, conroes and kentfield Here?
Hell no!! I felt priviledge my sloth is there with computers of every type crunching. That I wasa part, albeit a small part of this project.

OK Jose. I want say that due to my bad english level (which is true) there is a lot of misunderstanding between us. That's agreed.

Concerning the work done : That is correct. Everybody do what he can do.

COncerning Kentsfield/P4 :
I mean that every user desserve the same consideration whatever the work he has done. Here we call that democracy.

Why not go with the system of measuring credit done based on cpu and performance as planned, but instead of lowering scores, set the benchmarks up to be equal to what the optimized clients do now.

Great idea and one I suggested in the deleted thread but it got buried amongst the bickering. Its simple, keeps the big producers scoring their big points and allows the new, fair credit system to be adopted without anyone losing anything.

---

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.

If you can afford it more power to you.

Why should aperson that has bought multiple machines , and has fitted them with top of the line cpus, memory and mobos be treated like a pariah because he dedicated his machines 100% to a single project.

and that my friends is the impresion that many of you are giving: You want to get people that have the ability to get the big and powerfull crunchers running and that run them 100% in a project out of the projects.

The immages and adjectives that perception convey are not nice. So, I wont say them.

Dedication in terms of time commited to te project in proportion to the other projects should be rewarded aslo.

Why?
What's the benefit of it for the project, that needs to be rewarded?
Why should work done not be rewarded equally, but instead some fluffy "dedication factor", witch is strictly subjective?

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.

If you can afford it more power to you.

Why should aperson that has bought multiple machines , and has fitted them with top of the line cpus, memory and mobos be treated like a pariah because he dedicated his machines 100% to a single project.

and that my friends is the impresion that many of you are giving: You want to get people that have the ability to get the big and powerfull crunchers running and that run them 100% in a project out of the projects.

The immages and adjectives that perception convey are not nice. So, I wont say them.

Jose,
You made 2165 (sorry I have an optimized keyboards) posts here in 5 minutes. Tell me that it's only to make diversion? There are a few new guys here, you can trolling with them.

---

What I know.....

I`m tired, as must a lot of others be.

David Baker has stated " There will be no backdating"

The project has implemented a credit system that will be fair (possibly).

These new type credits will be added to the existing soon.

Too many cooks spoil the broth.

Communism doesn`t work.

There are people here who disagree with me but most will not do so just for the sake of it. This I commend.

I don`t disagree or agree with everyone all the time.

The only real solution in my eyes is to zero them all out and re-run the race but that cannot be done because of Boinc.

---

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

Make no mistake This IS the TEDDIES TEAM.

What I know.....

I`m tired, as must a lot of others be.

David Baker has stated " There will be no backdating"

The project has implemented a credit system that will be fair (possibly).

These new type credits will be added to the existing soon.

Too many cooks spoil the broth.

Communism doesn`t work.

There are people here who disagree with me but most will not do so just for the sake of it. This I commend.

I don`t disagree or agree with everyone all the time.

The only real solution in my eyes is to zero them all out and re-run the race but that cannot be done because of Boinc.

Neither Capitalism, but it still better ;-)

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.

You are misreading me...

a 100% machine regardless of its size should be recognized. But man, if a person has the money tobuy 100 conroes and run them here more power to them... that means there is a lot of extra work that is going tobe done.


Thierry I hope you are nit saying you want all the Kentfields and Conroes and Powr Macs and Xeons and the high end optys leave this project becasue a person running a slow P4 ( one like me)may feel insignificant?

People a reference in other threads has been made to my credits. I have a slow P4 that I call sloth for a reason. Not only slot is low...it was from the begining a magnet for corrupted wus and no credit....There are people here that can recall my cries everytime Sloth Crashed. :)

If I have the credits I have it was because I helped test a water cooled opty system.. So perish the thought I have a huge farm or a huge computer. The only huge thing in my house is me.

Did I feel bad my slotth cannot match the power macs, conroes and kentfield Here?
Hell no!! I felt priviledge my sloth is there with computers of every type crunching. That I wasa part, albeit a small part of this project.

OK Jose. I want say that due to my bad english level (which is true) there is a lot of misunderstanding between us. That's agreed.

Concerning the work done : That is correct. Everybody do what he can do.

COncerning Kentsfield/P4 :
I mean that every user desserve the same consideration whatever the work he has done. Here we call that democracy.

Man we agree on that too. Somehow in this whole thing a big chunk has been missed in the translation.

All I am saying is the same way you cannot penalize my P4 and yes I have a slooooooooooooooooooooooooow P4 , you cannot penalize or badmouth those who have the Kentfields , the conroes or the Power Macs for crunching here. And that is what it seems that have been happening here: a ganging up against the power crunchers.

( I was going to say something witty about MAc owners but I wont, hell would break over again)

I have used hyperbole , I may have gotten a tad too cute with my examples but people, there is a chance some rationality is finally comming to the credit granting. Let's stop fighting the battles that cannot be won or the issues that have and lets join in finding a good working solution.

In all this mess there is something many of you that are attacking me have forgotten; something the rablerouser Carl ( ;) ) pointed out: I stuck my neck out and asked for the new work system.

It seems that I am going to be the next victim of St Thomas Moore profectic words

"Blessed are those who stick their necks out for they wil have their heads chopped"

The only real solution in my eyes is to zero them all out and re-run the race but that cannot be done because of Boinc.

I agree, it is the only 100% fair way of obtaining an even playing field but its not going to happen because it will cause too many to quit the project. I do however think that the next best option is the one outlined in the first post of this thread, with or without backdating. However, it seems like another good idea is being buried beneath the bickering, little of which involves discussing the subject of the thread.

---

Dedication in terms of time commited to te project in proportion to the other projects should be rewarded aslo.

Why?
What's the benefit of it for the project, that needs to be rewarded?
Why should work done not be rewarded equally, but instead some fluffy "dedication factor", witch is strictly subjective?

Credits are fluff. So if we are going to have fluff the only thing that need to be agreed is how fluffy the fluff is going to be.

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.

If you can afford it more power to you.

Why should aperson that has bought multiple machines , and has fitted them with top of the line cpus, memory and mobos be treated like a pariah because he dedicated his machines 100% to a single project.

and that my friends is the impresion that many of you are giving: You want to get people that have the ability to get the big and powerfull crunchers running and that run them 100% in a project out of the projects.

The immages and adjectives that perception convey are not nice. So, I wont say them.

Jose,
You made 2165 (sorry I have an optimized keyboards) posts here in 5 minutes. Tell me that it's only to make diversion? There are a few new guys here, you can trolling with them.

I am answering the posts that are directed at me.
Talk to me I will answer.
Shout at me I will answer with the sae passion you shout at me.
Respect me , you earn my respect.
It is as simple as that.