Folding Forum

G wrote:All 3306 results that went uncredited have now been credited. You should see it in your stats at the next update.

Indeed.
Many thanks.

G wrote:All 3306 results that went uncredited have now been credited. You should see it in your stats at the next update.

Thank you

I would say MOST 3306 results...
After reviewing my records, I had 11 processed p3306's uncredited, yet 9 where (re)-credited.

During the hole incident I was sent two WUs for folding twice, so from my point of view I'm still missing credit for those two WUs. The double processed WUs where only cretided once. Sinse server failure is to blame (presumably) why should I (and others) be made responsible and receive only 1 credit for this ?

The WUs sent and processed twice :
p3306, r337, c3, g0 and
p3306, r1769, c2, g0.

I know I'm allways complaining, but as the customer, I dont feel bad about it.
How many folders quit due to a bad customer experience ? I'm not quitting, I'm complaining.

Why only one credit? Because that is the project policy. And because that becomes a slippery slope. I could upload duplicate work units all the time, and claim server error. It would also create a huge and unnecessary work load for Pande Group to sort through all the claims, recredit, etc. I'd rather have a simple rule, have one or two VERY RARE duplications, and have Pande Group concentrate on finding cures. I think most "customers" would prefer that policy, even if not all of them do.

But we do appreciate your feedback. Thanks.