7im wrote:IMO, you are singling out one line of Kasson's post and using only that to support your frustrations.
Read the whole thing. Also read Vijay's News Post on the points change. Read Vijay's
forum posts about it. They both speak of rebalancing the whole points system, and of making more changes.
Ask yourself, "What are they balancing?" "Scienctific value of the work vs. the points awarded" is the answer that comes to mind. And that's always been what points system adjustments are about. Better alignment of work to points.
And this change is
only in points. It has
not changed the science. The scientific value of a p6903 work unit has not changed. No science is being sacrificed as you claim. But I agree this is black and white. As you read in Vijay's post, they did their own analysis, and made the changes based on the facts they found, not based on public opinion or pressure. Donor feedback prompted the review, it did not determine the amount of the adjustment. PG determined that.
I really want you to highlight the part I missed. You and I both know that the point's for bigadv was readjusted because of people griping not scientific value. You can go back in this very thread and find a post by VJ saying the points were in line for the science done.
And yes science is being sacrificed I can tell that just by the amount of 2684's I am getting people are dumping them because they are now dogs worth less than smp. Go over to [H] and see how many they are getting now. The issue Kasson was speaking of was not addressed they just made it worse by encouraging the hackers to dump WU's they do not want for more favourable WU's. It is getting bad enough that I do not currently care about folding it is too big of a hassle for the return what is the incentive 7im. Let's see I spend $150 a month to power these puppy's after adding another 970 I am avg less than I was before the 6903's / 6904's came out and as far as I know that has never happened before. It may have happened with a certain WU but never with a whole class of folders Nothing is being done about the hackers but by god the points were dropped to even things out.
Any way as was said by Stanford they are prepared for the drop in bigadv folders so who cares anyway. I missed that the last time I read the thread you pointed out. Anyway my boat needs some gas I think I will use the $$$ there until winter rolls around.
And if you can not tell I am even more discouraged now. I believe the 2684's should either be raised up or dumped the hacking issue need to be addressed either shorten the deadlines and change the k factor or come out and say they do not care if it is being hacked, so that people who do care about the rules and guidelines do not get ridiculed in the community.
Any way it is not about the points it is about the confusing messages and the way things are being done. I do not care if my measly contribution was devaluated and it was, that is nothing but a thing.
Folding Forum
bigadv points changes
Postby kasson » Fri Jul 01, 2011 5:11 pm
After much discussion, we are adjusting the points bonus for bigadv. Bigadv work units have been given a 50% base points bonus over standard SMP; the rationale for this was to compensate for the increased system load, increased memory requirements, and increased upload/download bandwidth requirements. As judged from the high demand for bigadv work units, this has been very much a success, perhaps a little too much so. We would like to continue to offer a bonus for bigadv to offset the above factors, but we don't want demand for bigadv to overwhelm the rest of the project or imbalance the points system.
We are therefore dropping the bigadv base points bonus from 50% to 20%, effective for all work units issued this time onwards.
We very much appreciate the donors who have volunteered to run bigadv work units; these projects add substantially to our scientific capabilities. We do important science with all classes of work units, however, and we want the points system to reflect that. Based on extensive feedback, we are considering renormalizing other parts of the system but have not finalized decisions in that regard.
Thanks again for folding!
New points values, old points values, and unadjusted base values are given in the table below. Deadlines and k-factors remain unchanged.
"Standard points" is what the project would receive for base points if standard SMP. "Old bigadv" is the old bigadv base points (50% bonus). "New bigadv" is the new bigadv base points (20% bonus).
Project Standard points Old bigadv New bigadv Preferred Final k-factor
2684 8529 12790 10235 4 6 26.4
2685 5970 8955 7164 4 6 26.4
2686 5970 8955 7164 4 6 26.4
2689 5970 8955 7164 4 6 26.4
2692 5970 8955 7164 4 6 26.4
6900 5970 8955 7164 4 6 26.4
6901 5970 8955 7164 4 6 26.4
6903 18923 28385 22708 7.2 12 38.05
6904 26284 39426 31541 10.2 17 37.31
User avatar
kasson
Pande Group Member
Posts: 2066
Joined: Thu Nov 29, 2007 2:37 pm
.
2 - SM H8QGi-F AMD 6xxx=112 cores @ 3.2 & 3.9Ghz
5 - SM X9QRI-f+ Intel 4650 = 320 cores @ 3.15Ghz
2 - I7 980X 4.4Ghz 2-GTX680
1 - 2700k 4.4Ghz GTX680
Total = 464 cores folding