Now all some of you have done is continuously knock him and his team to the point all reasoning was lost.

From my POV the majority of what's said or suggested is taken as a knock on XS, even if it's completely unrelated to any team or individual- a good example being backdating.

I don't care for politics so I'm not really interested in that - I just want the project to be successful and for that it needs to be seen as consistent and fair.

---

I will address other points when I have time. But I would just like clarification on some things from Jose first...

Under the old credit system, would it have been unethical to change the XML files to claim more credit?

Would that have been considered cheating?

Was it always correct to grant what was claimed, or was there times when it crossed some sort of line and became cheating? If so, what was that line?

Well Saenger is altering his XML files. He said so only a few days ago on another forum.

BTW, team "SETI.Germany top scorer, position number 1." Oh look, he is using 5.5. Did'nt bother looking at the rest.

I think the point being made is that the lines being drawn are being drawn arbitrarily - it was all a grey area. For example, you could edit the xml benchmark score to a smaller extent than using an optimised client would.

One thing I think we can all agree is that the new credit system is a big improvement though ;)

---

OK now, this thread had died via what appeared to be mutual agreement that resetting the credits and starting a new one was not a great idea. It had gone more than a couple days without posting and is now just a thread for unproductive bickering. I hereby CLOSE this thread, but since I have NO power to actually do so. I just request people let it die. I'm changing the title to reflect it's latest posts.

Now all some of you have done is continuously knock him and his team to the point all reasoning was lost.

From my POV the majority of what's said or suggested is taken as a knock on XS, even if it's completely unrelated to any team or individual- a good example being backdating.

I don't care for politics so I'm not really interested in that - I just want the project to be successful and for that it needs to be seen as consistent and fair.

Since most of the arguments spouted by some of the Europeans in favor of backdating have come accompanied by attacks some times subtle, others not that subtle against Team XS, of course I will take them as attacks against my team.

All it takes is a re reading of many of those posts and they basically fall in into this format: Oh that bad XS Team, they accumulated so many credits it is impossible to catch them for top lead, so lets backdate. This accompanied with a rehash of the opti slander. That in my must humble opinion whining of the worst kind and it angers me: the whining and the slandering/libeling. And for many the case for backdating has been that: whine and slander.

The whining, in my opinion got so bad that , I in a moment that I am not that proud of , called those asked for the backdating on the grounds they couldnt take over top positions, Team Oscar Meyer. I am not proud of that , but It happened.

Worst the issue of backdating is being rehashed continuously even after Dr Baker and David Kim came into this Board and gave their word there was going to be Backdating. So for there to be backdating those two honorable men would have to do something that is less than honorable: renege on their word. Should they do that , there will be a lost of credibility : no if or buts.


I proposed the most fair solution: Archive all the credits as of lets say today, zero out the credits and restart under a new name Rosetta II. That will allow for a fresh start and will prove once and for all who has the machines, the dedication, the power to be numero uno under the new system.

Alas, my most fair and simple solution is not liked by all. ( That is an indication of how fair it is.)

So I propose as of October 1: Archive all credits , ZERO OUT , and restart under a new Name Rosetta II. And let the fun begin.

Lets hear all the howlling...

Okies : I have vented.

---

This and no other is the root from which a Tyrant springs; when he first appears he is a protector.”
Plato

Silly unproductive posts? You mean like this one?

---

Just to get the record straight:
I won't change your position, Jose, although I have a different one and don't understand yours, but I have to accept yours as you obviously won't listen without prejudice any more.

Here's miy position:
The whine and slander spouted by those that claimed more then normal for work done made the project let this vocal minority win and let fairness lose.

Now that you try to invent an european/american division to divert the discussion even more from it's core arguments (fair credits for work done in the past), it's clear for me that you don't want to come over with arguments, but only slander those who dare to disagree.

To your North is a wall...

To your South is a wall...

To your West is a Wall...

To your East is a door marked "EXIT"...It is blocked by three or four people


I see this is still popular !
_____________________________________________________________________________

Here's my position:
The whine and slander spouted by those that claimed more then normal for work done made the project let this vocal minority win and let fairness lose.

I would like this explained please Saenger. Who won what ? Are you talking of the Seti users whose cross project optimisation contaminated all projects ? When did the Devs give something to someone ? I missed that !

The statement fairness has lost ! Does that mean the new credit system is not fair ? OMG !

_______________________________________________________________________________


Round and round the Mulberry bush on a cold and frosty morning...;-)

BTW Written lies are "Libel" not slander! Nope I haven`t a clue in German, you`re better than me in that aspect !

---

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

Make no mistake This IS the TEDDIES TEAM.

Here's my position:
The whine and slander spouted by those that claimed more then normal for work done made the project let this vocal minority win and let fairness lose.

I would like this explained please Saenger. Who won what ? Are you talking of the Seti users whose cross project optimisation contaminated all projects ? When did the Devs give something to someone ? I missed that !

The statement fairness has lost ! Does that mean the new credit system is not fair ? OMG !

No the new credit system is quite fair, although it's still possible to get it even fairer with pending credit imho.

I'm talking about the past fluffed credits by "opt." clients, that will stay forever without a connection to work done. Those who wanted a recalculation of credits to make them meaningful in terms of work done (btw regardless in which direction, up for normal users or down for "opt." users) lost because those who only claimed more credits without doing (so much) more whined too loud.

O.k. Saenger most of your post was useful, save the last few words that were unnecessary.

I don`t disagree with a levelling scheme, not that my opinion counts for much I`ve left.

The Devs said because of technical reasons this was NOT going to happen, I didn`t say that nor Jose. It may have been too much work, they may have thought it hassle, whatever. It is beyond what IS going to happen. Calling them liars in saying they are just giving in to whomever is very disrespectful.

Jose has agreed with a zeroing, I haven`t heard you disagree infact I think you recently ignored it since Jose said it.

In my opinion the fairest way would be to zero and restart with an archive of old scores.( Howether there are drawbacks)

Those who WANTED a recalculation were TOLD quite a while ago by the DEVS it wasn`t going to happen.

Now as far as I can see, everyone is in agreement the new system is fairer. The Ref has ruled out certain play but there is one option left open. Now if you agree to that option you will be sitting in the same seat as Jose are you going to let personal animosity get in your way ?

Now I take a lot of stick because I have no respect for authority but in all honesty I don`t whinge when my post`s are deleted. The Devs made a decision regards backdating, long before Jose took up the cause, in your wisdom you are whining about the Devs decision not Jose`s. This show`s little respect for them imho.

If you think the Devs are wrong and not bowing to your wishes you have the same door I went through. The decision is yours.
______________________________________________________________________________

Addendum.

The project as far as I`m aware has implemented a hierachy that is to say....

If you have a complaint or idea, get your team captain (or yourself) to take it to the mods through email. The mods will assess and pass it upward through the chain as in all organisations.

---

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

Make no mistake This IS the TEDDIES TEAM.

I personly could comfortly live with zeroing out, if you look at my totals you probably know why ;)

I would have found another solution better, and that's the possible backdating that was imho prematrely ruled out (in my recall of history because of the complaints by "opt." users).

I would find zeroing out not a good solution in general, as it will strip the pioneers, that got all the hassle with the early testing, off their hard earned credits.

Those who WANTED a recalculation were TOLD quite a while ago by the DEVS it wasn`t going to happen.

Being told by someone it's not going to happen is not the same as being told it's impossible. "It's not going to happen" was a political, not a technical decision. David Kim had the data at hand, and afaik it would have been a bot-job to recalculate the credits.

But at that stage of the argument the flaming wasin full blow, so they decided not to go this path any further. I havn't heard of a technical impossibility until afterwards, as they said the data were now lost.

So imho it was a political diecision, and thus open for further discussion. I don't care that much whether the powers that be tell me something or not as long as the arguments are not exchanged, I'm a bit too democratic for that.

political decision -> discussion possible and necessary
technical decision -> discussion still possible, but not necessary

So what you are saying is that YOU are not happy with the project management ?


Simple yes or no.

"It's not going to happen" was a political, not a technical decision.

You are 100% sure of this in your evidence ?

---

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

Make no mistake This IS the TEDDIES TEAM.

Just to get the record straight:
I won't change your position, Jose, although I have a different one and don't understand yours, but I have to accept yours as you obviously won't listen without prejudice any more.

Here's miy position:
The whine and slander spouted by those that claimed more then normal for work done made the project let this vocal minority win and let fairness lose.

Now that you try to invent an european/american division to divert the discussion even more from it's core arguments (fair credits for work done in the past), it's clear for me that you don't want to come over with arguments, but only slander those who dare to disagree.

Saneger: I am not inventing anything: The majority of the whining came and is still comming from European Sources and from members of European teams. Sorry if you dont like the term whinning but that is the only word that fits what has happened.

Saddly you, yourself, keep beating the dead horse of the credits due to opti clients and keep the inflaming what should have been a celebration of the new and very fair credit system.

As far as a much fairer credid systems was implemented fairnes won. No if or buts. Or are you implying the new system is not fair?

But backdating OTHER than zeroing out and starting anew is not fair. Saenger, political or not the devleopers have given their word: unless you want them to be known as people that cannot be trusted with their word/promises backdating (wo zeroing out) is no longer possible. The loss of credibility would hurt this project as nothing else could.

Technically, the only feasible and reasonable and fair way of backdating is Zeroing out from a prospective date and start anew. Of course with archiving of the old data.

See what I get from you now is that your objections are to me. Sad

---

This and no other is the root from which a Tyrant springs; when he first appears he is a protector.”
Plato

Tony:

With all due respect to your intelligence and dedication:

This thread was unproductive and was a cause for silliness and trouble and non productive threads the moment you opened it as it was dealing with an issue that was closed : backdating. So your new tittle doenst reflect historical truth/reality.

So please dont blame those you invited by your posting of this thread. :)


PAIX

---

This and no other is the root from which a Tyrant springs; when he first appears he is a protector.”
Plato

So what you are saying is that YOU are not happy with the project management ?
Simple yes or no.

"It's not going to happen" was a political, not a technical decision.

You are 100% sure of this in your evidence ?

No simple yes or no possible.
I have no other evidence as the word of d.Kim in Ralph (which is Rosetta as well) that he thought it's possible, and a bit later he said afair that the data were now gone. It may have been a coincidence, it may have been a decision after a thorough data sifting that's it not possible, I simply don't know, and from the timing I deduct that it's been a political decision.

I'm quite happy with the project management sciencewise, I'm not happy with the pm communitywize in regard of credits, they were imho too lenient with overclaiming and credit fairness.

They have changed this now, so I'm happy for the future, but the past still sits there and nags at my confidence.

Jose:

Saneger: I am not inventing anything: The majority of the whining came and is still comming from European Sources and from members of European teams. Sorry if you dont like the term whinning but that is the only word that fits what has happened.

BS is an international team, with lot's of americans in it as well.
S.G is a german team, but afair I'm the lone member of us here.
Afaik XS is an international team as well, or was that impression wrong btw?

Regarding whining:
I don't know another term as well for the insisting of imho unfair high granted credits in relation to normal crunchers, and doing so in bold, red, oversized letters. Your insistence that the want for fairness is whining doesn't come over positive here as well.
And fair is imho only one thing: same work = same credits.

Edit:
As long as you call the want of fairness whining, I will definitely call the want for the stay of non-work-related credits whining.

I have no other evidence as the word of d.Kim in Ralph (which is Rosetta as well) that he thought it's possible, and a bit later he said afair that the data were now gone. It may have been a coincidence, it may have been a decision after a thorough data sifting that's it not possible, I simply don't know, and from the timing I deduct that it's been a political decision.

So you think project Devs are lying in stating the data is gone then ?

They have changed this now, so I'm happy for the future, but the past still sits there and nags at my confidence.

The past is just that. As you would ask others to let go of past things I ask you.

Regarding whining:
I don't know another term as well for the insisting of imho unfair high granted credits in relation to normal crunchers, and doing so in bold, red, oversized letters. Your insistence that the want for fairness is whining doesn't come over positive here as well.
And fair is imho only one thing: same work = same credits.

When a decision has been made whether political or technical it is law. Attempting to carry on discussing it ad infinitum in disagreement is simply whining or whinging. If a goal is allowed by the ref, even if TV evidence finds it wasn`t over the line ;-), it still stands end of.

---

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

Make no mistake This IS the TEDDIES TEAM.

So what you are saying is that YOU are not happy with the project management ?
Simple yes or no.

"It's not going to happen" was a political, not a technical decision.

You are 100% sure of this in your evidence ?

No simple yes or no possible.
I have no other evidence as the word of d.Kim in Ralph (which is Rosetta as well) that he thought it's possible, and a bit later he said afair that the data were now gone. It may have been a coincidence, it may have been a decision after a thorough data sifting that's it not possible, I simply don't know, and from the timing I deduct that it's been a political decision.

I'm quite happy with the project management sciencewise, I'm not happy with the pm communitywize in regard of credits, they were imho too lenient with overclaiming and credit fairness.

They have changed this now, so I'm happy for the future, but the past still sits there and nags at my confidence.

Jose:

Saneger: I am not inventing anything: The majority of the whining came and is still comming from European Sources and from members of European teams. Sorry if you dont like the term whinning but that is the only word that fits what has happened.

BS is an international team, with lot's of americans in it as well.
S.G is a german team, but afair I'm the lone member of us here.
Afaik XS is an international team as well, or was that impression wrong btw?

Regarding whining:
I don't know another term as well for the insisting of imho unfair high granted credits in relation to normal crunchers, and doing so in bold, red, oversized letters. Your insistence that the want for fairness is whining doesn't come over positive here as well.
And fair is imho only one thing: same work = same credits.

Edit:
As long as you call the want of fairness whining, I will definitely call the want for the stay of non-work-related credits whining.

RALPH is not Rosetta. It may be the testing ground for Rosetta but it is not Rosetta. So the policy for Rosetta is published and stated at Rosetta MB not Ralph's and it was in the Rosetta Boards that Kim and Baker said no back dating. So the issue is closed .

For the record; I speak for myself. I have stated that too many times to keep count . I am not a member of the administration or the leadership of XtremeSystems so you assuming that I speak for them regarding the issue of credit has no basis of fact.

If you want to keep banging your head in the wall , be my guest. I thought you were smarter.

---

This and no other is the root from which a Tyrant springs; when he first appears he is a protector.”
Plato

Edit:
As long as you call the want of fairness whining, I will definitely call the want for the stay of non-work-related credits whining.

Your point is disagreement with law (political/technical decision).

Jose`s point is political discussion in favour of existing law.

The law cannot possibly be changed now for whatever reason, it is written in stone. Any disagreement with it is a waste of time, therefore baseless whinging. If you are unhappy with a law that is not feasible to change what can I say to you ?

---

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

Make no mistake This IS the TEDDIES TEAM.

post to facilitate thread name change

LOL Tony. But possibly true...

---

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

Make no mistake This IS the TEDDIES TEAM.

Edit:
As long as you call the want of fairness whining, I will definitely call the want for the stay of non-work-related credits whining.

Your point is disagreement with law (political/technical decision).

Jose`s point is political discussion in favour of existing law.

The law cannot possibly be changed now for whatever reason, it is written in stone. Any disagreement with it is a waste of time, therefore baseless whinging. If you are unhappy with a law that is not feasible to change what can I say to you ?

Law????
This has nothing to do with law!!!!
This is just some science project with some fun aside. It's about fairness, not some nitpicking lawyers and small print weirdoes.
I don't care about what was once stated. If it's revealed that it was unfair, and if this can be changed retroactive, imho it has to be done asap for fairness sake. Not changing unfair conditions is bad, as well for the future, and if possible also for the past. The insistance on unfair earned profits is imho very bad manners.

P.S.:
Just saw the new title:
As I'm in working boots atm, and just been in a sufrid boiler for maintenance, my feet (and the rest of my body) will definitely stink now ;) But I'm on my way to the shower, so I will have to stop posting afterwards :)