Donor Rank isn't accurate

Moderators: Site Moderators, FAHC Science Team

klasseng
Posts: 125
Joined: Thu Dec 27, 2007 6:08 am
Hardware configuration: System #1, Quad GPU:
Motherboard: Asus Rampage IV Extreme
CPU: 6 Core Intel i7 (3930K)
GPU: 4 X NVIDIA GForce GTS 450
OS: WIndows 7 Home Premium, 64-bit
RAM: 16GB

System #2:
MacPro 2,1 (Early 2007)
Dual Quad-Core Intel Xeon 3GHz (X5365)
9GB Memory
OS: Mac OS X 10.7.5
GPU: N/A
Location: Canada

Donor Rank isn't accurate

Post by klasseng »

Or what does it mean?
On: http://vspx27.stanford.edu/cgi-bin/main ... amnum=1971

At this time I've got an "overall rank" or "Donor Rank" of 111.

But on the "daily user summary" list at: http://fah-web.stanford.edu/daily_user_summary.txt

I'm about 318th on the list.

I haven't contributed under any other username or team account, so there are no other points that boost me up to 111th.

I know I'm a really nice guy, but:
a) not nice enough to give me THAT much of a boost
b) there's no FAH scientific value in being a nice guy

does anybody know why I have a Donor Rank of 111?
peace,
Grant
John_Weatherman
Posts: 289
Joined: Sun Dec 02, 2007 4:31 am
Location: Carrizo Plain National Monument, California
Contact:

Re: Donor Rank isn't accurate

Post by John_Weatherman »

Somebody else has folded using the same name, I would guess (by the way, anybody is welcome to fold using my name - after 5 years folding and not even in the top 50,000 donors I need all the help I can get! :))
7im
Posts: 10179
Joined: Thu Nov 29, 2007 4:30 pm
Hardware configuration: Intel i7-4770K @ 4.5 GHz, 16 GB DDR3-2133 Corsair Vengence (black/red), EVGA GTX 760 @ 1200 MHz, on an Asus Maximus VI Hero MB (black/red), in a blacked out Antec P280 Tower, with a Xigmatek Night Hawk (black) HSF, Seasonic 760w Platinum (black case, sleeves, wires), 4 SilenX 120mm Case fans with silicon fan gaskets and silicon mounts (all black), a 512GB Samsung SSD (black), and a 2TB Black Western Digital HD (silver/black).
Location: Arizona
Contact:

Re: Donor Rank isn't accurate

Post by 7im »

What if 2 people are tied for points? You would still rank 1 higher, but in the list of all donors it would still be the same length.

Also, not sure if all accounts are ranked. I don't think Anonymous counts in the user rankings. Probably the same with some Pande Lab accounts.
How to provide enough information to get helpful support
Tell me and I forget. Teach me and I remember. Involve me and I learn.
Punchy
Posts: 125
Joined: Fri Feb 19, 2010 1:49 am

Re: Donor Rank isn't accurate

Post by Punchy »

Looks like a bug, or a different interpretation of "donor rank". PDC, awachs, AtlasFolder, Scott_H and kennish all show "donor rank" of 2.
AtwaterFS
Posts: 30
Joined: Wed Jan 21, 2009 9:08 pm

Re: Donor Rank isn't accurate

Post by AtwaterFS »

Yea its been totally wrong ever since I noticed it 2 years ago - use EOC, kakao, or equiv if u want accurate rank of your contributions
ImageImage
patonb
Posts: 348
Joined: Thu Oct 23, 2008 2:42 am
Hardware configuration: WooHoo= SR-2 -- L5639 @ ?? -- Evga 560ti FPB -- 12Gig Corsair XMS3 -- Corsair 1050hx -- Blackhawk Ultra

Foldie = @3.2Ghz -- Noctua NH-U12 -- BFG GTX 260-216 -- 6Gig OCZ Gold -- x58a-ud3r -- 6Gig OCZ Gold -- hx520

Re: Donor Rank isn't accurate

Post by patonb »

Not wrong..... just computed differently.
WooHoo = L5639 @ 3.3Ghz Evga SR-2 6x2gb Corsair XMS3 CM 212+ Corsair 1050hx Blackhawk Ultra EVGA 560ti

Foldie = i7 950@ 4.0Ghz x58a-ud3r 216-216 @ 850/2000 3x2gb OCZ Gold NH-u12 Heatsink Corsair hx520 Antec 900
klasseng
Posts: 125
Joined: Thu Dec 27, 2007 6:08 am
Hardware configuration: System #1, Quad GPU:
Motherboard: Asus Rampage IV Extreme
CPU: 6 Core Intel i7 (3930K)
GPU: 4 X NVIDIA GForce GTS 450
OS: WIndows 7 Home Premium, 64-bit
RAM: 16GB

System #2:
MacPro 2,1 (Early 2007)
Dual Quad-Core Intel Xeon 3GHz (X5365)
9GB Memory
OS: Mac OS X 10.7.5
GPU: N/A
Location: Canada

Re: Donor Rank isn't accurate

Post by klasseng »

@7im: I think a difference of 207 (318 - 111) rank positions is not accounted for by a few accounts that aren't ranked (like Anonymous).
Another way to look at it is that I have a little over 34,000,000 points. To actually rank 111th on the daily user summary, I'd have to have just about double that.
7im wrote:What if 2 people are tied for points? You would still rank 1 higher, but in the list of all donors it would still be the same length.

Also, not sure if all accounts are ranked. I don't think Anonymous counts in the user rankings. Probably the same with some Pande Lab accounts.
peace,
Grant
klasseng
Posts: 125
Joined: Thu Dec 27, 2007 6:08 am
Hardware configuration: System #1, Quad GPU:
Motherboard: Asus Rampage IV Extreme
CPU: 6 Core Intel i7 (3930K)
GPU: 4 X NVIDIA GForce GTS 450
OS: WIndows 7 Home Premium, 64-bit
RAM: 16GB

System #2:
MacPro 2,1 (Early 2007)
Dual Quad-Core Intel Xeon 3GHz (X5365)
9GB Memory
OS: Mac OS X 10.7.5
GPU: N/A
Location: Canada

Re: Donor Rank isn't accurate

Post by klasseng »

@patonb: OK, do you know just how the computations are different?
patonb wrote:Not wrong..... just computed differently.
peace,
Grant
klasseng
Posts: 125
Joined: Thu Dec 27, 2007 6:08 am
Hardware configuration: System #1, Quad GPU:
Motherboard: Asus Rampage IV Extreme
CPU: 6 Core Intel i7 (3930K)
GPU: 4 X NVIDIA GForce GTS 450
OS: WIndows 7 Home Premium, 64-bit
RAM: 16GB

System #2:
MacPro 2,1 (Early 2007)
Dual Quad-Core Intel Xeon 3GHz (X5365)
9GB Memory
OS: Mac OS X 10.7.5
GPU: N/A
Location: Canada

Re: Donor Rank isn't accurate

Post by klasseng »

@ AtwaterFS: Yeah, EOC has me @ 316 today . . . sound like that's about right.
AtwaterFS wrote:Yea its been totally wrong ever since I noticed it 2 years ago - use EOC, kakao, or equiv if u want accurate rank of your contributions
peace,
Grant
klasseng
Posts: 125
Joined: Thu Dec 27, 2007 6:08 am
Hardware configuration: System #1, Quad GPU:
Motherboard: Asus Rampage IV Extreme
CPU: 6 Core Intel i7 (3930K)
GPU: 4 X NVIDIA GForce GTS 450
OS: WIndows 7 Home Premium, 64-bit
RAM: 16GB

System #2:
MacPro 2,1 (Early 2007)
Dual Quad-Core Intel Xeon 3GHz (X5365)
9GB Memory
OS: Mac OS X 10.7.5
GPU: N/A
Location: Canada

Re: Donor Rank isn't accurate

Post by klasseng »

@ John: The difference between me @ 316 (today) with 34,166,987 points and the guy who really is @ 111 with around 68,000,000 points is a little too large to be accounted for by someone else folding with my name.

I've been keeping a close eye on my points stats. I have them all the way back to December 12, 2004 (when, with 664 points I was ranked 148,629th out of 403,123). No body snuck 34,000,000 points in while I wasn't lookin'.
John_Weatherman wrote:Somebody else has folded using the same name, I would guess (by the way, anybody is welcome to fold using my name - after 5 years folding and not even in the top 50,000 donors I need all the help I can get! :))
peace,
Grant
John_Weatherman
Posts: 289
Joined: Sun Dec 02, 2007 4:31 am
Location: Carrizo Plain National Monument, California
Contact:

Re: Donor Rank isn't accurate

Post by John_Weatherman »

Did n't realize it was such a big difference. Maybe Stanford can explain this one - they did change the donor stats awhile ago to not show project details. Could be that has messed things up (if not, where are my extra 34 million points?! :) )
bruce
Posts: 20824
Joined: Thu Nov 29, 2007 10:13 pm
Location: So. Cal.

Re: Donor Rank isn't accurate

Post by bruce »

Suppose there are three donor accounts: John, JOHN, and john@mydomain.com. Should they be combined to give a single place in the standings or should they be treated at three different people?

If they're all at a higher rank than you, your position can change by +-2 depending on how you answer that question.
John_Weatherman
Posts: 289
Joined: Sun Dec 02, 2007 4:31 am
Location: Carrizo Plain National Monument, California
Contact:

Re: Donor Rank isn't accurate

Post by John_Weatherman »

Seems like something's amiss by just looking at the top donors - anonymous and PS3 are both ranked 1, then the next 7 are ranked 2, places 10 to 15 are ranked 3, 16 to 20 ranked 5. I suppose it carries on like that, which would explain why there's a difference.
klasseng
Posts: 125
Joined: Thu Dec 27, 2007 6:08 am
Hardware configuration: System #1, Quad GPU:
Motherboard: Asus Rampage IV Extreme
CPU: 6 Core Intel i7 (3930K)
GPU: 4 X NVIDIA GForce GTS 450
OS: WIndows 7 Home Premium, 64-bit
RAM: 16GB

System #2:
MacPro 2,1 (Early 2007)
Dual Quad-Core Intel Xeon 3GHz (X5365)
9GB Memory
OS: Mac OS X 10.7.5
GPU: N/A
Location: Canada

Re: Donor Rank isn't accurate

Post by klasseng »

@ bruce: That's a nice supposition . . . only problem is, that there are only 3 pairs of usernames with more points than me in the "daily user summary":
- anonymous
- Jester
- mikejhyatt

None of the other top 318 usernames have any resemblances like you suggest.

So this supposition only accounts for 3 positions.

Even if there are duplicates, where one has more points than me, and another has less points, it wouldn't change my ranking.

But John Weatherman has pointed out above how ranking is messed up, I mean really! 7 donors in the top 10 are ranked @ 2!?
bruce wrote:Suppose there are three donor accounts: John, JOHN, and john@mydomain.com. Should they be combined to give a single place in the standings or should they be treated at three different people?

If they're all at a higher rank than you, your position can change by +-2 depending on how you answer that question.
peace,
Grant
John_Weatherman
Posts: 289
Joined: Sun Dec 02, 2007 4:31 am
Location: Carrizo Plain National Monument, California
Contact:

Re: Donor Rank isn't accurate

Post by John_Weatherman »

Just as a comparison, I'm at 51,718 according to Stanford and 56,906 according to Kakao. So that's more then 5,000 out.
Post Reply