Hi, this is the place to discuss communication and actions from project staff. Dicussion about the new credit system should take placehere.

Please be polite and constructive in your posts! For this thread there are more restrictive moderation rules enforced. It is not enough to not insult or accuse, you must be polite and constructive! If you want to express your anger please don't post but mail it to rosettamod( at )gmail.com

---

I am a forum moderator! Am I?

I would discuss project communication, but at the moment, it appears that there isn't any.

---

The project team is quite fast in hiding whole threads for some posts, that are declared flames and/or flamebait. It's thus very easy to destroy any discussion by simply start flaming, and soon all previous posts, even those with reasonable content and polite wording, are gone.

At the same time it seems to be a policy to strictly forbid any discussion of what's fair and how to measure it. The simple mentioning of the "optimized" clients in this regard seems to be Verboten.

The project team is quite fast in hiding whole threads for some posts, that are declared flames and/or flamebait. It's thus very easy to destroy any discussion by simply start flaming, and soon all previous posts, even those with reasonable content and polite wording, are gone.

At the same time it seems to be a policy to strictly forbid any discussion of what's fair and how to measure it. The simple mentioning of the "optimized" clients in this regard seems to be Verboten.

This has nothing to do with communication but with moderation, which is not the same :P
Start a "Discussion of forum moderation" thread please :)

Till now I liked the information given by the project team, could be better but hé It always will be ;)

---

This has nothing to do with communication but with moderation, which is not the same :P
Start a "Discussion of forum moderation" thread please :)

Till now I liked the information given by the project team, could be better but hé It always will be ;)

Moderation is an inherent part of communication. It's how they deal with discussion, not just aboiut the one-way-street of proclamations.

Hi, this is the place to discuss communication and actions from project staff. Dicussion about the new credit system should take placehere.

Please be polite and constructive in your posts! For this thread there are more restrictive moderation rules enforced. It is not enough to not insult or accuse, you must be polite and constructive! If you want to express your anger please don't post but mail it to rosettamod( at )gmail.com

The net effect of this statement is to stifle anyone who disagrees with you.
You folks ask for a constructive statement:
Here is one for you: Get out of the DC game, you don't understand the mentality of the people who support you.
Since you are not allowing me to express my thoughts here I will take it to the 200+teams and every public forum I can find.
Yes, you will delete this and I really don't care, this message is for you.
You have lost my respect. Since you don't seem to be aware of what that word means, I suggest you look it up in the dictionary.
Pass this on to the esteemed Dr. Baker: He may be brilliant and have a great idea with Rosetta but in terms of being a man,this expression fits perfectly:
"You have been weighed in the balance and found wanting"
Movieman

---

Movieman, I agree with you about the non-understanding of a DC-community.
I think that if the project had discouraged the "optimized" clients from the beginning, and had taken steps quite early against the overclaiming, instead of tolerating them, your team would not have complained about it, as the rules would have been clear and fixed.

Unfortunately they totally misjudged the importance of the credit system for the community, and were very lenient with it. This had to erupt at one point, and the damage is quite considerable now. Early action could have prevented this.

Movieman, I agree with you about the non-understanding of a DC-community.
I think that if the project had discouraged the "optimized" clients from the beginning, and had taken steps quite early against the overclaiming, instead of tolerating them, your team would not have complained about it, as the rules would have been clear and fixed.

Unfortunately they totally misjudged the importance of the credit system for the community, and were very lenient with it. This had to erupt at one point, and the damage is quite considerable now. Early action could have prevented this.

This may be the one and only time I will agree with you.
The root problem here is BOINC, all other problems came from that.
The new credit system is so flawed it is a joke.
It does not fairly and between WU assign credit and that is a fact no matter how they try and gloss it over and from what I read it's essentially a quorum of 3 that sets the points awarded?
I may be wrong on that but thats what I caught from a few posts here today.
Movieman

---

Hi, this is the place to discuss communication and actions from project staff. Dicussion about the new credit system should take placehere.

Please be polite and constructive in your posts! For this thread there are more restrictive moderation rules enforced. It is not enough to not insult or accuse, you must be polite and constructive! If you want to express your anger please don't post but mail it to rosettamod( at )gmail.com

The net effect of this statement is to stifle anyone who disagrees with you.
You folks ask for a constructive statement:
Here is one for you: Get out of the DC game, you don't understand the mentality of the people who support you.
Since you are not allowing me to express my thoughts here I will take it to the 200+teams and every public forum I can find.
Yes, you will delete this and I really don't care, this message is for you.
You have lost my respect. Since you don't seem to be aware of what that word means, I suggest you look it up in the dictionary.
Pass this on to the esteemed Dr. Baker: He may be brilliant and have a great idea with Rosetta but in terms of being a man,this expression fits perfectly:
"You have been weighed in the balance and found wanting"
Movieman

Hi Movieman,

You are right according to the quoted rules this post must be deleted. It probably will later when this whole thread is degraded but I make one attempt of not deleting it together with a (long) reply which I hope will persuade you and others not to continue this dogfight.

You have every right to disagree with the manner how this credit transition was handled and you have every right to express it. But if you lost your confidence in the project or in specific people from the project irretrievable than you should not post here but leave quietly. From a discussion with people you distrust completely nothing can be hoped for.
However if you think they just handled things improperly and can improve on it than you should write constructive and polite. That's why I asked to post here in such a manner.
Perhaps we should open a new thread "The project has completely lost my respect and I want to express my anger". In such a thread your post would fit in.

But before deciding between those two different ways of handling the situation (leaving quietly or making constructive criticism) you should investigate the credit system a bit further. In fact it is not like a quorom of 3 and it has nothing in common with slower machines are pulling granted credits down for overclocked machines. I wrote an overview how it is supposed to work here and further suggestions to level out any initial credit variation have been posted for example here. The variation of granted credit for similar WU is a problem and as such acknowledged by the project team. However that does not make the system "totally flawed" but just flawed. In fact it's those differences which decide whether a post got deleted or not.

So to sum it up, please take some time to rethink how this new system might work and refrain from expressing your anger. If you can't or you don't want - fine than it will continue like this (you post, we delete). We are not happy with this either.

---

I am a forum moderator! Am I?

Movieman, I agree with you about the non-understanding of a DC-community.
I think that if the project had discouraged the "optimized" clients from the beginning, and had taken steps quite early against the overclaiming, instead of tolerating them, your team would not have complained about it, as the rules would have been clear and fixed.

Unfortunately they totally misjudged the importance of the credit system for the community, and were very lenient with it. This had to erupt at one point, and the damage is quite considerable now. Early action could have prevented this.

This may be the one and only time I will agree with you.
The root problem here is BOINC, all other problems came from that.
The new credit system is so flawed it is a joke.
It does not fairly and between WU assign credit and that is a fact no matter how they try and gloss it over and from what I read it's essentially a quorum of 3 that sets the points awarded?
I may be wrong on that but thats what I caught from a few posts here today.
Movieman

In fact it is not a quorum of three. The new system basically compares all hosts which process the same WU and award those who do it quicker more points and those who do it slower less points. There are differences between different WU and between early and late results but those problems will be addressed. Practically I have not yet seen any host which suffered through that kind of variation (it averages out in 99,999%).

---

I am a forum moderator! Am I?

What happened to the New Credit system went live thread from yeterday? That had a LOT of good posts in it.

I fully do not agree with simply hiding whole threads instead of removing offending posts. It's laziness on the part of the person hiding the thread, and it dis-respects the opinions of the people who made good posts.

---

Proudly Banned from Predictator@Home and now Cosmology@home as well. Added SETI to the list today. Temporary ban only - so need to work harder :)



"You can't fix stupid" (Ron White)

the new credit system awards the producer in luck system ive seen the credits granted and this is a joke really.

i have a constructive criticism for you, realise we the crunchers are the base of this project without us the project dies, if we think a part of the project is flawed, the project managers should adress it, we hold the share me make the work and we dont see the benefits as we should? i think you guys really dont appreciate what we are doing here.

---

Another communication faux-pas.

Describing the now-defunct previous credit system as "cheating" in the "Good" section of this thread is sure to inflame people even more.

Does the project not realize that this is exactly what alienated most of the biggest team in this project? I thought that everyone would have been past calling the use of otimized clients "cheating" by now. Evidently that lesson has not been learned.

---

Proudly Banned from Predictator@Home and now Cosmology@home as well. Added SETI to the list today. Temporary ban only - so need to work harder :)



"You can't fix stupid" (Ron White)

Another communication faux-pas.

Describing the now-defunct previous credit system as "cheating" in the "Good" section of this thread is sure to inflame people even more.

Does the project not realize that this is exactly what alienated most of the biggest team in this project? I thought that everyone would have been past calling the use of otimized clients "cheating" by now. Evidently that lesson has not been learned.

Thanks Angus for pointing out that there was a way to read that part as accusing users of optimized clients cheaters. I've now clarified it. But don't you agree that it needs a bias to read my original sentence in your understanding?

---

I am a forum moderator! Am I?

What happened to the New Credit system went live thread from yeterday? That had a LOT of good posts in it.

I fully do not agree with simply hiding whole threads instead of removing offending posts. It's laziness on the part of the person hiding the thread, and it dis-respects the opinions of the people who made good posts.

I agree with you there were lots of good posts. However there were lots of bad posts and eventually someone pulled the trigger. I wouldn't but hey I'm new and not yet tired fighting with not helpful posts. ;-)

Not only some users got alienated but put yourself in the position of the project staff. They tried to address a concern of the user base (making a fairer credit system) and suddenly found themselve in the middle of accusations, demands, insults, etc. Now perhaps they have the impression playing with open cards is not helpful.

---

I am a forum moderator! Am I?

However if you think they just handled things improperly and can improve on it than you should write constructive and polite.

We keep doing that, and you keep deleting the threads. Stop it. You are forcing us to keep repeating ourselves.

---

Reno, NV
Team: SETI.USA

Another communication faux-pas.

Describing the now-defunct previous credit system as "cheating" in the "Good" section of this thread is sure to inflame people even more.

Does the project not realize that this is exactly what alienated most of the biggest team in this project? I thought that everyone would have been past calling the use of otimized clients "cheating" by now. Evidently that lesson has not been learned.

Thanks Angus for pointing out that there was a way to read that part as accusing users of optimized clients cheaters. I've now clarified it. But don't you agree that it needs a bias to read my original sentence in your understanding?

No- not in the context of the discussions here over the last few months where everyone using the optimized client was catagorized as a "cheat" by the other camp.

---

Proudly Banned from Predictator@Home and now Cosmology@home as well. Added SETI to the list today. Temporary ban only - so need to work harder :)



"You can't fix stupid" (Ron White)

the new credit system awards the producer in luck system ive seen the credits granted and this is a joke really.

i have a constructive criticism for you, realise we the crunchers are the base of this project without us the project dies, if we think a part of the project is flawed, the project managers should adress it, we hold the share me make the work and we dont see the benefits as we should? i think you guys really dont appreciate what we are doing here.

But that is what the project currently does - adressing the concerns of the user. They created a new credit system, users where not happy, they change it and tweak it and they listen to proposals how to make it really fair. What is your constructive criticism in this post? They should listen to the user base. They do! But the user base does not speak with one voice. So they need to seek a compromise. Or do you wanted to say, they should listen to the position of XS because we are the big guys?

---

I am a forum moderator! Am I?

However if you think they just handled things improperly and can improve on it than you should write constructive and polite.

We keep doing that, and you keep deleting the threads. Stop it. You are forcing us to keep repeating ourselves.

Than blame those who flame. If there is a certain limit of flames in a thread it becomes uncontrollable and has to be deleted - togehter with dozens of interesting and constructive posts.

---

I am a forum moderator! Am I?

One possible reason some members who ran optimized clients are upset is that, without notification, they could not dump the jobs already completed.

I anticipated the situation and reinstalled BOINC several weeks ago so that I would not be disappointed later.

Yes, project communication failed when David Kim did not describe the new points system as Dr. Baker said he would. Additionally, project communication failed when the new points system was implemented without notification. Worse yet, no one acknowledged that the points system had been changed until a day after some members had questioned the system changes on the message board. Apparently the moderators had not been told, either.

For someone not running an optimized BOINC installation, it did not matter. The new system seems fair to me, but if it isn't then at least it is consistent. It would be nice if we could give Dr. Baker the week he requested to evaluate the system before we get emotional about it.

I have a shortcut on my desktop to the message boards. I don't search the home page for news as often as management anticipated because I don't go to the message board via the homepage. It would help if there were an official announcements section on the message boards linking to information posted elsewhere. I can appreciate that much of the information cannot be presented well using BBCode, and it certainly isn't easy to do it without a preview feature. Using the RSS feed helps, but the feed link is at the bottom right of the home page and is easily overlooked.