Posts by kevint

1) Message boards : Number crunching : Problems with web site (Message 60045)
Posted 9 Mar 2009 by kevint
Post:
I\'m currently unable to connect with the web site over on Ralph@home, or connect to its servers. Is there a problem over there?



Ditto!

I have a cache of work - approx 150 WU waiting to report. Deadline is today.
2) Message boards : Number crunching : HUGE WU\'s (Message 28695)
Posted 29 Sep 2006 by kevint
Post:

This morning I thought that I would try to crunch a few more WU\'s for Rosetta -

So I opened the flood gates on 40+ crunchers - only to find my internet line bogged down due to the very large WU\'s. Most of these WU\'s are over 3 meg in size -

3 MEG ??????? This is worse that SIMAP !

I am forced to abort the downloading on over half of my crunchers due to the extreem size of these WU\'s



3) Message boards : Number crunching : Closed to all, but those with stinky feet (Message 28353)
Posted 24 Sep 2006 by kevint
Post:
It\'s the usual problem with this topic.

The Project admins or scientists (D. Kim or D. Baker) refuse to come on here and say one way or the other whether backdating is even possible, or if they would even consider zeroing out credits and startin over with Rosetta 2 or whatever you would call it.

Until that happens, this is just all noise.



They have, WEEKS ago - to them it is a dead issue - they have come here on this message board and said NO -

That is why this thread is so stupid, discussing a dead issue.

KevinT find that post and I\'ll close the thread.

tony

4) Message boards : Number crunching : Closed to all, but those with stinky feet (Message 28318)
Posted 23 Sep 2006 by kevint
Post:
Agree, this project was coerced into the new credit system by a few and you are exactly correct - if those with little or nothing to loose (can\'t use the z word here) keep complaining then the project is going to die a slow and painful death.


I believe I was one that requested the change to a credit-for-decoy based system because it would eliminate problems like xml editing, and get us away from the accusations of optimized clients users cheating. If you consider me a \"ZR\", then so be it. I recall there being at least one post by a larger pharmer that agreed that a work based system was a fair solution to the problem, so it wasn\'t just us smaller members of Rosetta. If we post once and were listened to, I take it as proof that our single posts were better thought out than any of the alternatives that were presented.



Nope, you are not a ZR, In fact there is nothing wrong with it either. IMO, it is not a negative thing. Some of us have the resources, some don\'t no big deal. Every one counts, that is why DC projects are so popular, because even the guy with a single CPU can contribute. I have several machines that have a RAC of 25-30, but they still crunch.

Lets not get off topic here. The topic I thought was zeroing out the credits. Elimiating the credit for work that has been done in the past. Some crunchers have done more than others - so what. Everyone should be able to keep the credit they have earned and go forward with the new system without someone constatly saying \"lets zero out the credits\"

5) Message boards : Number crunching : Closed to all, but those with stinky feet (Message 28313)
Posted 23 Sep 2006 by kevint
Post:
It\'s the usual problem with this topic.

The Project admins or scientists (D. Kim or D. Baker) refuse to come on here and say one way or the other whether backdating is even possible, or if they would even consider zeroing out credits and startin over with Rosetta 2 or whatever you would call it.

Until that happens, this is just all noise.



They have, WEEKS ago - to them it is a dead issue - they have come here on this message board and said NO -

That is why this thread is so stupid, discussing a dead issue.

KevinT find that post and I\'ll close the thread.

tony

6) Message boards : Number crunching : Closed to all, but those with stinky feet (Message 28312)
Posted 23 Sep 2006 by kevint
Post:

Post 30 by Dekim was in relation to having just one column labelled \"granted credit\", instead of having both \"Granted Credit\" and \"Granted work credit\", as they had in Ralph during the testing.



Wrong, again Tony, - read it as it is quoted:

\"30) Message boards : : Number crunching : New credit system already live
Posted 30 days ago by David Kim
\"We made a final decision and the decision was to keep the credit totals and just switch over to the new system. \"\"


The credit totals are to be kept in place and just switch over to the new system. The final decision.

This post is from the Rosetta site, not the RALPH site, not that it would matter anyway.

And if you will look here
http://boinc.bakerlab.org/rosetta/forum_thread.php?id=2153#24111
You will see that the issue had already been decided and closed.


Now Tony, do as you promised, drop the subject.
I have proven the issue many times over, this has been discussed, decided and put away, no need to keep bringing it up. - AND you know it has been discussed and decided, no need to say things like you don\'t have an opinion, everyone knows your opinion, you have made it perfectly plain many times.

7) Message boards : Number crunching : Closed to all, but those with stinky feet (Message 28311)
Posted 23 Sep 2006 by kevint
Post:
I`ve nothing more to add now, so I`ll disappear into the night once more. I hope I`ve gained a little respect from some, I know some hate me which is fair, I`m a big loud character not to everyones taste. Some here have gained a lot more of my respect, some not.

I honestly do not think the project will zero the points in anyway but I do believe in free speech for all. I think the concern from Kevin and the likes is that the project was talked into a new credit system by a few and might be talked into the same about zeroing, not that I`m saying either is true. I believe that is how some see it.

And with that I wish you adeui, till another time perhaps.....

<Big sigh of relief all round>



Agree, this project was coerced into the new credit system by a few and you are exactly correct - if those with little or nothing to loose (can\'t use the z word here) keep complaining then the project is going to die a slow and painful death.
8) Message boards : Number crunching : Closed to all, but those with stinky feet (Message 28309)
Posted 23 Sep 2006 by kevint
Post:
Tony,

I found another one - I did not even have to look at that far.
Even if it is a post by Ethan -

http://boinc.bakerlab.org/rosetta/forum_thread.php?id=2161#23944

http://boinc.bakerlab.org/rosetta/forum_thread.php?id=2118#23568

Recalculated also includes zeroing out.


9) Message boards : Number crunching : Closed to all, but those with stinky feet (Message 28301)
Posted 23 Sep 2006 by kevint
Post:
KevinT, I agree they said Backdating is not an issue. This thread isn\'t about backdating.

Post 30 by Dekim was in relation to having just one column labelled \"granted credit\", instead of having both \"Granted Credit\" and \"Granted work credit\", as they had in Ralph during the testing. See this post and this post which all lead up to that comment.

I have never seen a post saying \"we won\'t be resetting credit and starting over\" or any such post.

Resetting of credit was only ever brought up ONCE by a newer poster and he was quickly roasted into submission. There is no \"over and over and over\".

It is far better for users to come to the conclusion one way or the other and to drop this subject on their own, rather than being forced to do so. If it\'s done naturally through civilized discussion, then it will be agreed upon and long lasting.



Did you even read the links I provided ?
(and why the links to RALPH, I provided links for the production site, not test sites, come on you can do better than that)

I am sorry but I think this comment by Dr Baker states:
http://boinc.bakerlab.org/rosetta/forum_thread.php?id=1177#23501

\"Second, To answer a question which came up on the boards--we will NOT be backdating credit totals. The new system will go into place early next week, adding on to the current totals.\"

Catch that last bit there - ADDING on to the current totals, which means - NO ZEROING OUT OF CURRENT CREDITS.

I knew you just could not bow out - you also said you have not seen this brought up in discussion, but it is painfully clear to me and I would suppose most others that since you have posted in the threads that discuss this issue, you either have a problem with long term memory or just choose to forget. Case in point - your 2nd post on this thread is all about back dating.

Move on - it is not going to happen, zeroing out, leveling the playing field, or any other term you choose to use here.

Just crunch on and go foward, it has been decided.




10) Message boards : Number crunching : Closed to all, but those with stinky feet (Message 28297)
Posted 23 Sep 2006 by kevint
Post:
It\'s the usual problem with this topic.

The Project admins or scientists (D. Kim or D. Baker) refuse to come on here and say one way or the other whether backdating is even possible, or if they would even consider zeroing out credits and startin over with Rosetta 2 or whatever you would call it.

Until that happens, this is just all noise.



They have, WEEKS ago - to them it is a dead issue - they have come here on this message board and said NO -

That is why this thread is so stupid, discussing a dead issue.

KevinT find that post and I\'ll close the thread.

tony




PROMISE ??? PROMISE NOT TO EVER BRING IT UP AGAIN ??

here is just a few comments I found on the issue - I have not the time nor energy to go further.

Search David Kim\'s Posts yourself. I did.
http://boinc.bakerlab.org/rosetta/forum_thread.php?id=2153#24821

AND TONY - you will notice that YOU posted in the above thread - how can you claim you have not seen this subject brought up and discussed before - Come on, you are smarter than that.
http://boinc.bakerlab.org/rosetta/forum_thread.php?id=2153#23721

http://boinc.bakerlab.org/rosetta/forum_thread.php?id=2153#24821

And from Dr Baker\'s home journal
http://boinc.bakerlab.org/rosetta/forum_thread.php?id=1177#23501



And a quote - \"thread has been removed\" From David Kim.
\"30) Message boards : : Number crunching : New credit system already live
Posted 30 days ago by David Kim

We made a final decision and the decision was to keep the credit totals and just switch over to the new system. \"


There are MANY posts of this nature by the project devs over a month old.. many of the threads have been removed - but you can search by posts by David Kim and others -

Now -

Please close the thread, and have the Mods remove this silly dead horse discussion.


11) Message boards : Number crunching : What inspires you about Rosetta@Home? (Message 28294)
Posted 23 Sep 2006 by kevint
Post:

How about this - lets chat about this again instead of the other junk that keeps coming up!


I crunched Rosetta because of I like being able to contribute what I can - I am not a doctor and understand next to nothing about it, but being able to contribute what I do understand - computer power.

12) Message boards : Number crunching : Closed to all, but those with stinky feet (Message 28293)
Posted 23 Sep 2006 by kevint
Post:
It\'s the usual problem with this topic.

The Project admins or scientists (D. Kim or D. Baker) refuse to come on here and say one way or the other whether backdating is even possible, or if they would even consider zeroing out credits and startin over with Rosetta 2 or whatever you would call it.

Until that happens, this is just all noise.



They have, WEEKS ago - to them it is a dead issue - they have come here on this message board and said NO -

That is why this thread is so stupid, discussing a dead issue.



here is just ONE comment I found on the issue - I have not the time nor energy to go further.

http://boinc.bakerlab.org/rosetta/forum_thread.php?id=2153#24821



And a quote - \"thread has been removed\"

\"30) Message boards : : Number crunching : New credit system already live
Posted 30 days ago by David Kim

We made a final decision and the decision was to keep the credit totals and just switch over to the new system. \"
13) Message boards : Number crunching : Closed to all, but those with stinky feet (Message 28292)
Posted 23 Sep 2006 by kevint
Post:

This would be like voting on whether the rich should be taxed and selling votes for a dollar each.




Hey, I did not bring it up, I only responded - but I think it is a great idea.


This discussion should have been dead as soon as the proj devs said no - that was over a month ago to my recollection. They said there would be NO backdating and NO zeroing out of current credit status.

When a decision has been made by the project developers do people continue with the conversation and start new threads WEEKS after the decision has been made - If not to pick a fight, then what ? Discuss because he has nothing else to do with his life than spend hours compiling huge graphs, and re-re-re hashing old issues over and over again ?

The issue of zeroing out credits and backdating has been discussed, voted against by the project developers. Why continue ?

Lets move on people - get your brain out of neutral and go forward.
14) Message boards : Number crunching : Closed to all, but those with stinky feet (Message 28288)
Posted 23 Sep 2006 by kevint
Post:


What don’t you understand - 1 credit = 1 vote = it was mentioned here that there should be a vote on zeroing out or backdating credits. This was in reply to that.
I.e. your credits = 37,161 so you would get 37,161 votes.
I have 2,449,509 credits, therefore I would have 2,449,509 votes = lets see who would win.

You say this is a \"civilized discussion\" ? Over what ? A dead issue. There is no reason to have any sort of further discussion on this matter, civilized or otherwise.

Tony only brought up this issue to re-fan the flames. This has been discussed to death and should NEVER have been brought up again.

IMO - this entire thread should be removed because of it\'s plain silliness.
15) Message boards : Number crunching : Closed to all, but those with stinky feet (Message 28285)
Posted 23 Sep 2006 by kevint
Post:
Good point that there\'s also a potential for gain.

Is there any way that we could take a random poll of users about the issue? It would need to be solicited of the entire contributing community rather than just those who visit the message boards.


A vote - 1 credit = 1 vote.


I STILL don\'t understand why Tony brought up this subject again and again and again and again and and and -

There is no reason to start Rosetta II - and start credits over again in a new project - this is still BOINC.

Just move on boys and girls - move on.

And Tony - WAKE UP !!!!!! This has been talked about until it is dead, buried and rotten. Bringing it up again will only inflame the situation.

And did not I read a few posts back you sayin \"See a discussion has started\" Is this what you really want? Another dead flame fest of the idea of back dating credits ? This is why Rosetta lost so many crunchers because of the \"threat\" of this action -

Do you really want this to happen again.


TONY - YOU ARE HURTING THIS PROJECT - PLEASE LEAVE !!!
16) Message boards : Number crunching : Closed to all, but those with stinky feet (Message 28136)
Posted 22 Sep 2006 by kevint
Post:


WHAT !!! another thread about back dating and zeroing out credits ????


Tony - you are INSANE! (and you MUST have an opinion about this or you would not be still bringing it up) - and this is NOT something new to talk about. This has been re-hashed and voted against by the project devs.


NO
NO
NO


and H*** NO!


If this happened, not only would the project loose those that have crunched, but it would loose out on potential crunchers.

And I would make it a mission to make sure that this happened here- I would post in every single project as often as nessesary to the way the project treated those that contributed to the project\'s current success.

You would see this project die.
17) Message boards : Number crunching : No annonymous moderators (Message 28134)
Posted 22 Sep 2006 by kevint
Post:
RE: Making Jose a moderator... let\'s do that. Jose, identify the posts in your thread here which require deletion for taunting others, name calling, and being off-topic. There\'s 70 posts in here. And only about 2 or 3 ideas express about annonymous moderators.

In fact, if you were faced with the realization that this thread has degraded into nothing on-topic anymore... and had to pick the posts that represent the topic and start a new thread... and move them one at a time, which message IDs would you preserve?

[edit] You, as moderator, have no Ban feature. You can only delete, move or manually copy content in to a new post that you create yourself.

It is ironic that the first thing you wanted to do as moderator was to ban certain posters.



If I were a moderator, I would ban moderators from posting.
18) Message boards : Number crunching : Another another thread (Message 27239)
Posted 18 Sep 2006 by kevint
Post:
-On second thought -
Edited - the original post - self modded and deleted by me.

I will return to this project - someday - maybe.

Till then,
Have fun - crunch on!
19) Message boards : Number crunching : Another discussion on the New Credit System (Message 26960)
Posted 16 Sep 2006 by kevint
Post:

I guess I have been modded for \"taunting\" HUH ?

I guess I am gone - modding has gone just a little to far.

maybe next time.
20) Message boards : Number crunching : Another discussion on the New Credit System (Message 26892)
Posted 16 Sep 2006 by kevint
Post:
ok everyone, can we discuss the new vs old credit systems here (i.e. on topic!)? What\'s anyone\'s thoughts on the old vs new systems?


new one sucks


Next 20



©2019 University of Washington
http://www.bakerlab.org