Thierry does a system of parity across Boinc exist ? I take it not from the Bruce post, that being the case Boinc totals are pretty much meaningless imho.

(although these boards would make an interesting case study, says one who has studied sociology.)

And whats that suppose to do?

Post from Thierry with deleted comment removed:

Saenger, please don't add a level of suspicion. I just read a post at the Einstein board where some people find the credit too high and put an accusation that that will drain too much users to Eisntein.
We can say that for every project if we want.

Each project don't want to leave CPU power and have to navigate trough all icebergs.

That's what I think, and that's what I always thought.
But the lack of words of discouragement, even if no real enforcement was possible, still bugs me.

5.5 was inflating the credits, the credits recorded 'til now are more or less worthless for any competition, and the project has the possibility to change that (at least they stated so).

I probably will like the new system, it will probably be far better, and I thank the project team for implementing it. I only don't understand why they won't go the whole way.

As Ethan said, the only thing we can have is a new equal credits. It's too late to remove the inflation due to opti.client. It's the only way they have to not loose users. You have to accept that, I think.

John, in the new system it doesn't matter what client users have. . the credit claims get averaged out and everyone gets the same work credit.

The one big disadvantage with external forum software is, that in case of trouble with rosetta, there is no easy way to have a look at the erorrs, because the nick are not linked to the boinc database.

VBB (Vbulettin) is loverly to use, we use it at our forum. They are also nice people from what I remember. They MAY if you ask them help with integration into BOINC, they may not of course ;-)

It should be possible to have the boinc sign up integrated into most fourms. I know at Find-A-Drug they managed to get the sign up through the client to also then sign you up into the phpBB forum automatically.

It just a matter of altering some code to get data from the databases (though I wouldn't know where to start :-)

Given you have the code in the boinc forum for that (which is php code) and phpBB or vbulletin are php code wave a wand and they might splice together, lol

www.vbulletin.com

The is also other boards as will.

...I think everyone understands.

I'm a bit unsure about that, as some still claim the 5.5 did "level the playing field", while it did the opposite.

What the client did or didn't do isn't relevant, nor are the motives of those who used it. It wasn't forbidden by the lab and the science results were valid and helped the research. I only wish to stop this line of posting since it doesn't help where were at now after Dr. Baker has stated that there will be no back-crediting.

Hey,

I am new to Rosetta as of a few days ago! I was noticing that in my user account that there is a different cross project ID listed compared to what is show in the other projects that I run (Seti, CPDN, and Predictor).

I was wondering why this was and if there was anyway to get them all to show the same thing?

[edit] i should probably mention that they are all registered with the same email address[/edit]


thanks in advance.
citroja

mmciastro, it's configured through the BOINC General preferences. Not all projects let you configure this yet, but Rosetta@home is one that does. Look for the "Use at most" CPU setting.

The "cpu throttle" in a future "undetermined" version will basically turn on and off the application. I.E on for .5 seconds, off for .5 seconds, depending on the setting. I've not even seen it tested yet and I am a boinc alpha tester. It remains to be seen how effective it might be.

thanks for the link

tony

(I don't recall any spammers turning up on the boinc forums).

Again, Who cares about BOINC?

John talk about optimized applications not optimized BOINC client. He is consistent.

Split all the hairs you want. He is not consistent.

You can shift and backtrack and repostulate your claims and statemenets but, nothing you and the likes of you say and do cannot change the fact that from the get go:

THE DEVELPERS HERE HAVE ALLOWED THE USE OF OPTIMIZED CLIENTS. THEY decided from the begining how to run the application in such a way that allows the use of the optimized client.

by ethan

If I could lock a thread and remove individual posts I would, but the only option is to delete.

by halifax-lad

Good thing would be for the new forum code to be uploaded that allows devs & mods to bar people from the message board system for upto 2 weeks in a row

which dr. kim thinks is an excellent idea.

by ethan

I wish it was that easy. The problem is we don't have the ability to edit messages.

by ethan

I don't have the ability to edit, unfortunately.

by angus

David Kim's only visible post from the last 24 hours (of two) is to tell us that he's going to install more ways to block people from posting.

David Baker won't post here, but will post on the XS site about the backdating topic, and his only two other posts have likewise been hidden in the banned thread.

The only other project representative - Ethan - hid the thread that has the majority of the discussion on the whole issue.


And - you wonder why this project has MAJOR PR problems? Gee... who would have thought. All the goodwill that's been generated over the last 6 to 8 months has been flushed away. No longer is Rosetta the model BOINC project that's renowned for it's communication with members.

i have to say angus, this is the first time i've agreed with you, but i have to ask.....can you still defend this type of message board as being appropriate for the size and scope that the rosetta project has become? it's painfully obvious that as it is, it's not working, either for the participants or the moderators. and i for one don't understand their reluctance to fix the problem.

by mikemars

The PHP forum is far easier to moderate than the boinc forums, simply because there are more tools at hand (thread locking, editing, private messages, banning of IP ranges, ...). The single most useful tool is private messages - the benefits of being able to have a quiet word with somebody without involving everybody else are enormous.

this solution has been proposed a few times before mike, but i don't think has been taken seriously.

from dr. baker, by way of whl

Dr Baker Wrote :

Please remember everybody, I'm a scientist trying to solve science problems, and I am relatively new to the sociology of distributed computing. I don't think it is true that the complainers are having a disproportionate influence over the project. The new credit system was proposed by many people over the past months, and I don't think anyone thinks it is not reasonable.
The problem with the offensive posts is very hard to deal with--it would require a full time moderator which we don't have (it is basically me and David Kim right now, and I don't even know how to delete stuff and believe me I have a zillion other things to do as well--trying to deal with this issue is certainly making it difficult to focus on science today). And the boinc developers are already swamped and can't make changes to address these issues either.
PLEASE--try to think about the science and the benefits to humanity, and ignore the taunts from the little guys--they just don't matter--and I hope all this will blow over soon. You have been making a fantastic contribution, and I would hate to see this cause any disruption to our collabortive efforts together.

perhaps we could convince dr. baker that a regular php board could be implemented and then have trusted volunteer moderators, thereby taking some of the workload off the project scientists.

the benefits of having that are

a. better organization of posted material
b. the ability of the mods to keep things "civilized" thru deletion of posts, private message warnings, locking of threads and banning
c. a daily posts button to cut time spent reading post to a minimum, which would save the mods time.

the cons are that

a. the message board won't look the same
b. you'd have to re-register for it. (which might be a blessing in disguise)

as large as rosetta has become, don't you think it's time to solve this problem, or do you really want things like this to flair up over and over again just so you can whine that you can't fix it for whatever excuse you can find.

The problem is not the medium, but the message.

You can have the biggest. bestest, whiz-bang mesage board ever, but if the project people don't post it's all a waste. Dr Baker does his thing on the science topics, but that's it. We don't get squat on the nutz and bolts of running the project, what modding goes on is done by anonymods.

And yes, I can still defend using this board as is. 3 sections, plus the Q&A for newbies. Easy to find where things are posted. Just need to lean on BOINC admin to get someone to fix the code bugs.

As for php bulletin boards - arrgh. Big targets of hackers and spammers, separate registration required, not integrated. Takes way too much time to implement and maintain for a project of this size.

This is the part of a post I like best. I hope it's a hoax post, and Dr Baker never said such a thing. Roughly 90% of his active hosts fit this description

PLEASE--try to think about the science and the benefits to humanity, and ignore the taunts from the little guys--they just don't matter--and I hope all this will blow over soon. You have been making a fantastic contribution, and I would hate to see this cause any disruption to our collabortive efforts together.

http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/showpost.php?p=1662478&postcount=20

Maybe, just maybe, you read the whole thing wrong, and should have extended the bold font 2 or 3 words to the left. So, it's not the little guys that don't matter, but rather it is thier taunts that don't matter.

If you read it your way, it's a big insult to many contributors, which I am sure Dr Baker would NEVER do. If you read it the way I outlined, it's trying to convince a bunch of contributors not to leave just because of a flamewar.

Look at it this way : If you moved the bold font two words to the right, one could read that Dr Baker favours female participants. So please keep thing in perspective.

The attempt should be made to keep parity across projects. I admit it will be impossible for it to be perfect, but it should be possible to get fairly close. The place to start would be a clear statement banning the optimized BOINC clients from participating in RALPH. If this is done and enforced, then the new method should come fairly close.

I do agree with you, but with BOINC being open source there is nothing to prevent someone from putting subtle changes into the source. A couple of percent here and there isn't really noticable to begin with, but it adds up.

Really, in using Ralph to calculate averages for the granted work credit, the benchmark and some form of timer need to be built into Rosetta itself so that it can't be easily modified. Even then it would still be possible to hack the binaries, but it would at least be something that was challenging instead of something that any kid with a bit of programming knowledge could change.