I just looked at the new CASP results (CASP7 target T0330 domain2), and two of the four "top predictors" have total credit of 0.00 (maverick and Kerr Sweetin), how is this possible?

Sekerob [caution: "cheeky" comments ahead]

On-Topic.....Baker/Kim have said the subject is closed and right they are.

This is a senseless, and unsubstantiated claim. Either post direct references or don't post at all! What is the point of asserting such a thing and not backing it up with hard facts? And what do you care? Your RAC is low anyway.

[I just wanted to practice the new style of "board-speak". I hope you find it amuseing]

[quote]This thread has become as productive as trying to agree if it is Ketchup or Catsup the name of the condiment you place over Hot Dogs.

Ketjap (sounds alike, but is dutch for soya souce)
In german and dutch it's Ketchup, btw.

See another example of miscommunication that can lead to flames: I did not ask for the German or Dutch word? I wrote a plain question in English so, the answer has to be referenceable to the language I wrote in.

And I hope that by know people are starting to realize my point: if a simple question about a simple condiment written in plain English can be misread, misinterpreted so people go all over the board answering what was not asked about; Guess what happens when the comments and or questions posited ar about a charged issue like credits.

Thanks be to G-d there is no relationship between Catsup or Ketchup ( which are both valid names for the same condiment in English) and credits. Had it been , there would have been a major flame war by now. :)

Actually you did not ask a question at all. So people are just giving an opinion on your statement.


P.S. Actually in English (true english, it is Ketchup or Red Sauce. Yours is just a regional language of American English ;-))

So now an answer has to be given to the PS...of course in Red



A little article for your edification and instruction...

KETCHUP VERSUS CATSUP
[Q] From Suzanne: “Why is ketchup also called catsup?”

[A] Ketchup was one of the earliest names given to this condiment, so spelled in Charles Lockyer’s book of 1711, An Account of the Trade in India: “Soy comes in Tubbs from Jappan, and the best Ketchup from Tonquin; yet good of both sorts are made and sold very cheap in China”. Nobody seems quite sure where it comes from, and I won’t bore you with a long disquisition concerning the scholarly debate on the matter, which is reflected in the varied origins given in major dictionaries. It’s likely to be from a Chinese dialect, imported into English through Malay. The original was a kind of fish sauce, though the modern Malay and Indonesian version, with the closely related name kecap, is a sweet soy sauce.

Like their Eastern forerunners, Western ketchups were dipping sauces. I’m told the first ketchup recipe appeared in Elizabeth Smith’s book The Compleat Housewife of 1727 and that it included anchovies, shallots, vinegar, white wine, sweet spices (cloves, ginger, mace, nutmeg), pepper and lemon peel. Not a tomato in sight, you will note—tomato ketchup was not introduced until about a century later, in the US, and caught on only slowly. It was more usual to base the condiment on mushrooms, or sometimes walnuts.

The confusion about names started even before Charles Lockyer wrote about it, since there is an entry dated 1690 in the Dictionary of the Canting Crew which gives it as catchup, which is another Anglicisation of the original Eastern term. Catchup was used much more in North America than in Britain: it was still common in the middle years of the nineteenth century, as in a story in Scribner’s Magazine in 1859: “I do not object to take a few slices of cold boiled ham ... with a little mushroom catchup, some Worcester sauce, and a pickle or so”. Indeed, catchup continued to appear in American works for some decades and is still to be found on occasion.

There were lots of other spellings, too, of which catsup is the best known, a modification of catchup. You can blame Jonathan Swift for it if you like, since he used it first in 1730: “And, for our home-bred British cheer, Botargo, catsup, and caveer”. [Caveer is caviar; botargo is a fish-based relish made of the roe of the mullet or tunny.] That form was also once common in the US but is much less so these days, at least on bottle labels: all the big US manufacturers now call their product ketchup.


And the a nasty comment would follow: something like the question was implied...cant you think?

We get a moderator in...and voila!!! We have us a flame war!!!!!!

:) :) :)

On-Topic.....Baker/Kim have said the subject is closed and right they are.[/url]


What's that got to do with stinky feet ?


:)

This thread has become as productive as trying to agree if it is Ketchup or Catsup the name of the condiment you place over Hot Dogs.

Ketjap (sounds alike, but is dutch for soya souce)
In german and dutch it's Ketchup, btw.

See another example of miscommunication that can lead to flames: I did not ask for the German or Dutch word? I wrote a plain question in English so, the answer has to be referenceable to the language I wrote in.

And I hope that by know people are starting to realize my point: if a simple question about a simple condiment written in plain English can be misread, misinterpreted so people go all over the board answering what was not asked about; Guess what happens when the comments and or questions posited ar about a charged issue like credits.

Thanks be to G-d there is no relationship between Catsup or Ketchup ( which are both valid names for the same condiment in English) and credits. Had it been , there would have been a major flame war by now. :)

Actually you did not ask a question at all. So people are just giving an opinion on your statement.


P.S. Actually in English (true english, it is Ketchup or Red Sauce. Yours is just a regional language of American English ;-))

This thread has become as productive as trying to agree if it is Ketchup or Catsup the name of the condiment you place over Hot Dogs.

Ketjap (sounds alike, but is dutch for soya souce)
In german and dutch it's Ketchup, btw.

This thread has become as productive as trying to agree if it is Ketchup or Catsup the name of the condiment you place over Hot Dogs.

No, it's mustard.

This is neither a national nor a team issue, it's just an issue of different ideas about fairness. I highly doubt that any country can claim to have the one and only justice (even though some politicians do - but we're not here for political weirdness)

Is more science being done now without the people that left that could be done had those that left stayed ? Of course not as those that are added now, must first fill in the vacuum of work done by those that left . Had those that left staid, more work would have been produced than it is now/
This isn't necessarily true. There has been a large and continuous influx of new crunchers, including some big DC names such as Agafonov_KY. Of course it would be a massive boost to have the old crunchers return too, but it is personal choice.

Rosetta's loss is WCG, Leiden and other projects gain.

As long as the project is worthwhile, then indeed it is. ;)

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.

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.

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.

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'm gonna stick my neck out: the whole benchmark system and optimised clients were flawed because they didn't align to work done. The clients got higher benchmarks by using extensions such as SSE1-4 which Rosetta doesn't use. If someone had released a client that also ran the benchmark on the graphics card's GPU and got a score 20x higher than any other, would that be fair? It's still an optimised client so it's still legal. Is it fair? It's certainly not aligned to work done.

Some might argue that using the GPU is irrelevant because Rosetta doesn't use the GPU, but then it doesn't use SSE1-4 either so why is the GPU any different? I'm taking it to a logical extreme, but as an example it shows the grey area that, not just the optimised clients, but the whole benchmark system leads to.

It was a system that was good enough to get the project going when there were other priorities, and then when they were able to return to it, there was an opportunity to make the credits aligned to work done, rather than the fairly arbirary benchmark scores given.

Fair enough, but why all the challenges of XS vs the world in every thread?
...The new credit system, backdating, or any other credit changes or improvements have no more relevance to XS than to any other team or any other member, so I don't see any need to discuss any particular teams in discussions of credit!

I guess it depends on what you consider value, but for me it has to be work done, and for that we know they are probably accurate only to within 4x or so. It didn't have to be so but it is. I don't mind that - I'd have prefered it to be accurate, but I'll not loose sleep over it!

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?

But the stats don't have any value until the new credit system took place.

It wouldn't be re-writing history, it would be getting an accurate account of it.