Good Morning Earthlings, I am an undercover E.T. working for my superiors on Sirius A - you know, those 2 stars somewhere in your galaxy.

I've been here long enough to make a detailed report on whether or not we make first contact...........

..........and to be honest, my report will state NO.NO.NO

When asked as to why not? My report will state the following: -

Earthlings cannot work together for a common gaol
They enjoy attacking each other
They hate cultures different from their own
They are power mad
They are greedy
They are untrustworthy
They are too warlike

We should consider sending out a galaxy wide quarantine notice to avoid Earth at all costs!

---

Earthlings cannot work together for a common gaol
They enjoy attacking each other
They hate cultures different from their own
They are power mad
They are greedy
They are untrustworthy
They are too warlike

Isn't that the truth. All this for a few credits?

---

...what we couldn't figure out is why you were denying it.

Funny that. Haven't denied anything. But thanks for acknowledging that people will use credit as a form of weight in an attempt to get their way. That's an incredible abuse of power, a power that should not exist in the cruncher's hands.

Now you're claiming to have NOT stated credit has no value?!?!? That's not talking in circles, my friend, that is an outright lie.

As far as a users ability to utilize their crunching power as a leverage tool, that already exists too. Neither BOINC nor the individual projects have the power to dictate where I or any other user places the bulk of our resources...that decision is, always has been, and most likely always will be, at the sole discretion of the user....and why shouldn't users input be taken into consideration?

I don't believe it's an incredible abuse of power...It is simply a reality...And it has been for quite some time...It's a reality that might be resented by some who can't seem to tolerate any discouraging words...The power crunchers should have some influence here...the more one has invested in hardware that crunches more data...the more likely they are to have relevant suggestions or criticisms...Because they likely have thought more about how things work here than someone who has not elected to become a full blown power cruncher...
Abuse of power...no i don't think so...

Ahh, but it is. Any attempt to exert sway over another person or organization for personal gain is an abuse of power.

So essentially, you're saying that if the Mafia has its hands in enough government programs, that somehow they should be allowed to have influence over the decisions of the government? Sorry, I've seen this happen in small scales (a family tried bringing in all of the members to the same company, then tried running the company based upon their own needs). I can't agree with this at all, on any level. Just because a cruncher has a large investment, doesn't mean their motivations are pure for the project at all. That thinking is incredibly naive.

Most certainly the crunchers should have a right to speak, and to be heard, but no project should have to give in to what a group of people want under the ultimatum that if they don't, they'll leave. I don't care who you are, that's just plain wrong.

Laughing Out Loud...

Now you're comparing crunchers to organized crime? Laughing Out Loud AGAIN!!

Look dude, it's not rocket science. You're trying to punish users for the "potential" weakness of the project Admins to be influenced by what you seem to be labeling as an outside source.

Anyway you try to spin the situation, it all boils down to the individuals in charge and you can't solve that problem by manipulating the end user. Just like if the mafia had it's hands in the system, you wouldn't punish the voter, you punish the elected official.

...and as I stated before, the project doesn't have the ability to dictate when and where the end user places the bulk of their resources. The very root of your justification is flawed, plain and simple.

---

This is a typical private message. Since I have a large stack of these I guess it it better to bring it out in the open, and, though this is one persons/question response ... it is typical of quite a few ...

For those that don't like long posts ... TOUGH! Don't read on ...

Paul, Are you back? It's been a long absence. Good to see you around BOINC.

not for long ...

And the more I see, the less I wan to stay

Is it just SETI or all the BOINC projects?

yes ...

Both ...

I note that the same arguments and problems (for the most part) are still here, even though we talked about most of these in BOINC Beta!

- Why do people leave ...
- High attrition rate ... 271 TC jumps me up 1,854 people (of 9,000)??? another project 928 TC jumps me 13,554 (of ~90,000)???
- Why is the credit system unfair/broken ...
- Developer's ignoring important problems because they don't understand the need
- Bugs
- Flames ...
- Projects not paying attention or caring about the participants ...
- etc.

The only thing that seems new is the lack of passion *FOR* BOINC ... I do note many familiar names, and, sadly have forgotten many others that still carry the torches on high, but even you guys look tired ...

After 2 years hiatus my return has shown me that there is NO compelling new feature that would attract me to BOINC or the BOINC world.

The GUI is the same, the "simplified" version stinks and is obviously designed by geeks for other geeks, and the "advanced" version simply has more switches and features that are, of course, not explained in the so called "help" page.

Just as an example, the new "advanced menu" has an option to look a preferences with no clue that if you click Ok that you have taken your computer out of the web based preferences... or for that matter, whether you are *ON* web or *LOCAL* preferences.

Half of the projects have no compelling screen saver.

I see postings still bemoaning the need for more participants, and with more projects the available pool of participants and their computers is spread over a wider pond. As I noted above, the fact that in a week I can jump over 13,554 participants in the rankings list with an absurd production of 928 CS means that AT LEAST 15% of the participants have done less for just that one project...

In the thread in "Politics" I posted some of these, and other, observations in that thread that then degenerated into another discussion of credit, and it arcane minutia ... another constant ... all threads degenerate towards a reference to Adolph Hitler, or BOINC Credit ...

Project still want to live in their ivory towers pretending that participants are only a figment of their nightmares, and can safely be ignored in the light of the day. After all, they are just a bunch of unreasonable whiners ... Why should we talk to them, there are more important things to do ...

Where is Astropulse? The other promised projects database visibility, etc (I for get their names, my apologies)? I only mention these rhetorically because they illustrate the perpetual problem. THe projects complain about over work and lack of time and yet avail themselves not of resources readily available ...

The excuse that science is hard and boring is so much bovine refuse. These projects are boring because no one on the project is doing anything to make them not boring. When i was small there was a VERY popular TV show about science that was aimed at children ... again, memory fails. But science is boring because no one takes the time to make it un-boring, with rare exceptions... Yet Hawking writes best sellers ... Sagan ... well, you get my point ...

Just to finish this one point ... if the SETI database was available, even as a compressed raw data dump in a zip file (and why not, what is secret?), who knows what I might have done with that data ... after all, that is what I used to do for a living, analyze systems, and data ... oh, my, yes, data and the patterns within ...

When you are born autistic, as I was, you live in a different world than everyone else ... you see things that no one else sees. Hypocrisy is one thing... when people say one thing, or profess strong belief in something, and their actions show just the opposite. The guy that professes a belief that the credit system is flawed and that his tool that exploits the flaw doesn't make the situation worse. The project guy that professes a lack of time yet refuses offers of help because there is that slight chance that things won't be done exactly as he would have done them ... no matter that the results would likely be little different, if not better ... but, better to refuse than to lose even an iota of control.

Instead of fixing systemic problems, and real issues ... what do I see ... web site "eye-candy" that is cumbersome in use and adds nothing of value. Web controls with the most confusing list of this works with this versions and this does not work with that version ... version of what? and how does the work with the other sites running different versions of the web software ... oh, and be sure there is no documentation ...

Ah, yes, my personal peeve ...

BOINC the project only wants to see BOINC the tool ... SAH only wants to see SAH ... EAH only wants to see EAH, Rosetta ... well ... you get my drift ...

The problem is simple ... that is not how the participant, particularly the non-technical person sees the thingie ... He/she sees BOINC which CONTAINS projects ... quite simply BOINC is a system with participants, BOINC, Projects, their research, work and results, etc ...

An therein lies the problem ... still ...

Because each only wants to see their part of the elephant ... none is willing to to take that next step that is still so necessary ...

In my long prior BOINC career I made many proposals ... *MY* recollection is that I batted about 0 for 1,000 ... all of them had one intent ... to fix these systemic problems, and a few minor irritants ... and here we are .. the same problems I and others identified in the Beta lo those many years ago, well, still here ...

I saw a comment about how whiners about credit should just shut up, that credit is an intangible and worthless ... and completely misses the point. The person that wants his green star is not whining, nor a wuss, neither is the person that wants a proper accounting of his work effort. They want to be paid in the coin of the realm for their effort. You and I could walk into the same store and buy a little gold anchor with two stars ... and we both could wear that little pin ... yet, the difference is that I *EARNED* the right to wear that pin ... it is very likely that you did not ... and that makes all the difference in the world. The guy that did was was needful to get the star should get his star...

Processing a piece of work should earn the proper payment ... regardless of the coin ... Platinum coins in EverQuest have no intrinsic value either ... yet, they are the coin of the realm. Having more, well, that is better than having less ...

My CS score is of no value, yet it is a way I demonstrate to the world that "I DID THIS..." I earned this ... when you go to work in the morning it is with the full expectation that you will be fairly compensated for your labor. The same is true here ... The other discussion that was mostly about the use of optimized applications and their effect on earnings (from my perspective) completely missed the point. Regardless of how long a time it took for me to produce the work, the pay is the same. If I get the result faster, regardless of how, is not relevant. I pay for the chair, no how long it took you to make it ... as long as it is made to standard ... in this case, did it validate? If so, same pay ... If I have a faster machine, or a faster processing application, irrelevant ...

But, not to ignore the cross-platform issue, well, that was the point of using a synthetic benchmark ... of course, in the Beta phase we proved that it was ineffective in predicting processing performance. I know, I was part of the effort, heck, I may even have some of the spreadsheets around ... I know I put some of the data into the Wiki ...

But this is an issue that the BOINC team wants to ignore ... and I have seen the excuses ... even the new one about the projects are doing "x" ... the reality is that they don't want to deal with it because they can't see the importance because they never look at BOINC the System which includes more than BOINC the application.

It is bad enough that the projects abdicate responsibility for everything that is over their own self imposed horizon. It is worse that they individually and collectively do things that exacerbate the situation.

My last effort was to try to coalesce the community ... the response was, to say the least, tepid ... to hostile ... but that is what this is ... a community that has users and developers and projects ... I would say that it is similar to the Linux community ... but it isn't ... because, the collective we refuse to see it ... when I was still able to track things the Linux community was dynamic, vibrant, and full of hope ... perhaps someone in the know can tell me if this is still true, or not ...

But, taking that as a model ... where could BOINC be now?

Users proposing changes, discussing them, deciding on what features are necessary, and which can wait ... and then the developers, from all over the world ... making the needed changes while we argue the next set of features ...

Engaging the users in the discussions and not giving them grief because you don't see the need for a feature ... The problem is that if the participants see the need for a feature and you don't, and prevent that feature from being realized, then you are the problem now ...

The university project using the resources, like the marketing classes, to help us develop marketing strategies ... oh, I forgot, you have too much to do and this would help BOINC and not your project ...

And, yes, documentation ... I failed to get my "Unofficial Wiki" made into the "official" one because UCB wanted it to cover ONLY the BOINC application ... ignoring the fact that the user does not see BOINC the application as distinct and separate from the projects they run ... and in many cases, the interaction between the two IS the problem. Though UCB now is using Wiki format for their content it is, as he said in the movie, "written like stereo instructions" and thereby useless for real people. And the unofficial one? The recent changes shows two entries ... so I guess it is perfect? Another friend told me about their FAQ, and I looked at it, and I suppose that it is good, but, now we have 3 places and three people that have to update for every change ... and this I learned from just coming back ...

And so, to find fault ... no wonder we are so busy. We are all doing the same things... over and over and over... duplicating work because we let our ego says we can do it better and I want control in all aspects of whatever or I won't play with others ...

And thus ignore the lesson of Wikipedia, which is why I did my work in Wiki format ... so *WE* the BOINC Community, could coalesce around a common agreed upon knowledge base ... But no, we all know that we know better than the other guy ... and besides ... mine is better ...

I wonder where we would be now if not for one bit of intransigence ... would I still be willingly paying for hosting the BOINC Wiki where ALL BOINC projects documented the technical aspects of their projects? Where if you had a question about the BOINC interface you went to a page that had more than one line non-explanations about the tool ... where if you did not understand a web page ... somewhere there was an explanation? Indeed, where could we be now if we recognized that we were a community that was stronger because, though I let you walk on my grass and your dog do his thing there I was still better off because I not only gained fertilizer, but a friend and neighbor.

Instead, we have fences that we refuse to look over ... and armed with our shotguns we blast away at those that challenge the orthodoxy of our faith that the world is flat and my project has no responsibility for the BOINC application ... and it none to the projects ... and neither to the people that use it ...

When I left two years ago I explained why... and some labeled me whiner and good riddance ... and so ... get the label gun out again ... label me what you will ...

I don't, and never have, pretended to have a monopoly on the truth, or the best idea... but that is why I always did the best I could to craft the proposal and then to submit it for review and comment.

And so, yes I did leave and the reason was more complicated than just disgust and failing health ... though my struggles trying to make BOINC better and the frustrations the failures engendered, once ended made an immediate and positive change in my health. And it was never just about one project changing my account and thereby 'stealing" 171,000 some CS ... it was the fact that the project could act against anyone with impunity. My love of irony noted that while looking about, that same project had done similar things to other participants.

In the service I learned about authority, responsibility, and accountability. I learned what it means to be a leader and how few people who think they are, really are ... sadly most people that consider themselves leaders are merely people invested with power. A leader knows that he has authority over those reporting to him, but he also has responsibility towards them and accountability for his decisions and orders. When a subordinate of mine erred and the commander wanted a name to send to a courts martial, he got mine. I had not been there, i did not make the mistake ... but with authority and responsibility is the duty of accountability ...

What do I see after two years?

- People exerting their authority with no accountability ...
- Abdication of responsibility
- Projects asserting independence while denying any responsibility for their actions (or lack of action)
- Denial
- Hate and dissension ...

And so, no, I don't think I will be here long ...

Why should I stay?

For the science? Where is the science? How and where is it presented so that it is meaningful TO ME? I joined one project where the page describing the point of the mathematics is so obtuse that the only reason I could conceive that a person would join is just to cut a notch in their belt.

So I can improve BOINC? Don't make me laugh ...

To write documentation? Yes I know, you can't make people read it ... but have you looked at most of it? The Unofficial WIki started getting like it is because I was trying to change the style to make it acceptable to the authorities I only later realized would never be pacified ...

For the credits? When any project can take them from me, as one already has, for any reason, or no reason at all?

To post an read comments that call me names? For those that have been around you can recall, I hope, that we could disagree without being disagreeable ... though, yes, even I did on at least one occasion step over the line ...

The question was "why do people leave?" ...

Take a good look around ... and then you tell me ... why should I stay?

When I bought a Lexus LS400 I knew why I wanted to own and be part of that experience; the comfort, the speed, the quality (they did hate that I kept calling it pea green, though that is what it looked like under the indoor lighting, it looked far better in the sunlight, and it changed color slightly with the weather, quite pretty), a love at first sight ...

When I bought this new Mac Pro 8 Core 3.2 GHz machine with 10 G or RAM, 2.38 TB RAID 5 array and another TB of internal storage, and a 5.46 TB backup array, well, I know why I want that ... the speed, the power, the beauty, the utility ... When I offered one of Nancy's friends one of my old computer she was disappointed that it was not my old PowerMac G5 that I was getting rid of ... of the 4 computers she could see, 2 Mac and 2 PC ... she wanted the Mac without question ... now that is engineering ... that is beauty ...

Love at first sight ...

Look around all of the BOINC world and tell me what is attractive here?

Who falls in love with BOINC at first sight?

I will bet no one in the BOINC development world has asked anyone that has the skills and ability to answer that question. And if a participant with those skills and abilities offered advice, well, I bet it was as well received as my proffered advice about areas where I was the subject matter expert.

And if you read this, and know a project person ... well, send it to them. Because they too should be asking the question ... why should I be there in your project ... what are you doing to make your project attractive to me? Are you going to explain the science so I can understand it? Me the non-whatever scientist? Me the human, your neighbor? Are you going to talk to me? Spend time with me? Listen to me? Oh, I forgot, you have important things to do ... after all, who needs users?

Then again ... all of those project people can once more abdicate responsibility ... after all ... its just *ONE* user ... we can ignore the loss of one user ... But how many others could he or she brought in if you could have made the sale? How much can I do, how much could I have done for you in those two years I was gone?

But the truth is, we are not just ONE user ... we am tens of thousands of users that come, and leave ... because you did not make the sale ... but it is only one customer ... you cry ... the death of the thousand cuts ... but, no matter, Paul is only one guy ... who needs him? Who needs the other schmuck, more work for ...

Retailers know that it costs 10 times more to get a new customer than it costs to keep one ... as a project, guess what, you are a retailer ... you are selling your project, and you are failing at it ...

Tell the truth, are all your neighbors crunching work for your project? All of your friends? If all your friends and neighbors are not working for you, well, you don't have an answer to a simple question ... If your friends aren't helping you, why should strangers?

Why should I be here in your project ... why should anyone be here ... why should I stay ... why should I do anything for you ... what are you going to do for me ...

For those that like to call other people names... how does that help your favorite project? If it is to get rid of the competition for that top slot, then this is about *YOU* and not about SAH or whatever project you profess to care about.

In 1972 I met a person and in 5 hours spread over 5 days I knew this was the person I wanted to spend my life with ... in 1975 we married and I have never regretted that decision. Not quite love at first sight, but close ... and even after all these years she is still as beautiful ... and that beauty extends throughout the world she passes through ...

So, last time ... why *SHOULD* *I* stay ... what in heaven's name is attractive about BOINC? Or an awful lot of the people that inhabit the BOINC world? Forget love, for heaven's sake, is there anything to like? Anything attractive?

Answer if you can, because I sure cannot see it ...

Flame or disparage as you will, you only prove my point ...

---

As Richard says - OUCH!

Paul is very correct in many of his points. It will take some thinking through!

In my case various project screen savers are never run, as I think that is pointless eye candy

---

It's good to be back amongst friends and colleagues

In the service I learned about authority, responsibility, and accountability. I learned what it means to be a leader and how few people who think they are, really are ... sadly most people that consider themselves leaders are merely people invested with power.

Quoted from my profile:

My greatest disappointment in life came when I realized that the people above me were not better than me, mentally, physically, nor spiritually... And that 'rank' was nothing more than the devils stamp of approval to do corruption in the land... ~ me

Thanks for putting it in perspective... ;)

---

It may not be 1984 but George Orwell sure did see the future . . .

I agree with you, Paul. Is why that what this thread was moved from 'Number Crunching' to 'Politics'. To hide it to the crunchers. Only read it now who are subscribed it at the first... Or the 'flamers' who wants to destroy it with their offenses and disqualifications.

[edit]The first purpose of this thread was the fall of interest of the users in SAH, and your post explains why perfectly.[/edit]

Best regards.

---

Logan.

BOINC FAQ Service (Ahora, también disponible en Español/Now available in Spanish)

[It doesn't take any thinking through at all. Everyone all over the world knows exactly what is wrong with the SETI project. Paul has listed most of it out already. Unfortunately SETI has an attitude of "Dont tell us what we don't want to hear" or if you do we'll ban you.....

It is not about SAH, alone ... nor any other project alone, nor any one individual ...

We have met the enemy ... as Pogo once said ...

This *IS* about BOINC though posted here ... it could be posted on ANY project board and still be relevant, or at least in my opinion it could.

But, like all my other, ahem, dissertations ... it too will disappear into the swamp with nary a burp ...

I mean, I made essentially the same points much earlier in the thread only to have them disappear under a long digression about credit ...

Now why it was moderated from a new thread into only a comment, well, *MY* first impression was so that this too would disappear ,,,

Had I wanted to discuss the general issue I would have posted in this thread as I had. At least I THOUGH I had made clear this was about me, my return, and what looks like my soon approaching departure ...

Two years ago moderators acted with discression, and usually with discussion with the originator ... re-read the part about authority without accountability ...

For that matter, what is political about people leaving SAH OR BOINC for that matter?

Does the loss of people not directly affect production? As in number crunching?

One would think I was making an endorsement of a candidate ... or at least that is what I would have expected in a forum dedicated to, ahem, politics ...

Or, are my opinions by definition, political?

---

I mean, I made essentially the same points much earlier in the thread only to have them disappear under a long digression about credit ...

You can thank someone other than me for that, since they wanted to play "drop hints and see if he can guess my position" rather than just cutting through all the coyness...

In any case, credit is a motivator, in as much as the screen saver is a motivator. As indicated by someone else, not everyone finds having a screen saver as a top priority. You apparently didn't find the discussion about real parity as a top priority. However, I'm not issuing a semi-demeaning statement to you about how it is not pertinent to me... That is not a "flame", it is just a statement of fact. So far, the information I've seen leads me to a conclusion that SETI has opted to put some optimzation in, but they could put all the optimzation into the stock app, but they don't feel they have the manpower to maintain it. Is it "fair" to other projects that do take the effort and do feel like they can maintain it to be accused of being "bad citizens" if they offer a higher credit reward?

Both of those issues are pertinent to both of us... When people actually sit and start listening, then we can begin prioritizing what is a higher priority. I would actually side with you and say that for the progress of the platform (BOINC) as a whole, the screen savers would be a higher priority, since I think the fact that most users are not in it for the absolute highest amount of credit is not something that anyone will dispute.

---

Why is this thread hidden away in "Politics" ?

This should be stickied at the top of NC.


Where are the posts by Eric, Matt and The Director (David Anderson) ?

---

In any case, credit is a motivator, in as much as the screen saver is a motivator. As indicated by someone else, not everyone finds having a screen saver as a top priority.

I don't find the screen savers useful or interesting because, they waste CPU cycles and second don't REALLY involve you in the science in most cases, or, don't reflect any reality of what the program is doing at all (LHC the last time I checked), or the project does not have one at all, or, for only windows, or ...

{edit} though I agree that they are important and SHOULD be there for those that enjoy that feature ...{/edit}

And, I think you missed *MY* point in that I agree passionatly that credit is a motivator. If not THE motivator in that it is the only thing the participant gets out of virtually ALL projects (well, the eye-candy, maybe).

As far as Credit awards, parity, fairness, go back an look at some of my old posts ... I don't think that there were many others that were more passionate advocates of credit parity and fairness and the issues involved. I am too dispirited to search for it, though a quick search did not turn it up locally... but I had an initial design for a self-calibrating credit system that got rid of the artificial benchmark and the problems of optimized applications and optimized science applications ... and got laughed out of court and told that credit fairness was not an issue ...

Besides, credit is not real so it is not important ...

If I can work up the energy I will look in the Unofficial BOINC Wiki to see if I can find it ... I know I put it somewhere on-line ...

[edit2} see: improved...{/edit2}

---

Hi Paul,

The excuse that science is hard and boring is so much bovine refuse.

Did someone actually use this excuse or are you paraphrasing? Science is easy. Project management is hard. And the structure of most projects doesn't make it any easier. Here we've got no one between us and our volunteers. A commercial project would have a large, well-paid layer of middle management.

It's funny, no one volunteers to be middle management. And if they do, they often don't have the skill set. The number one skill that a middle manager needs to have is knowing when to ask their boss a question: never. The job of a middle manager is to prevent upper management from ever needing to give direct guidance or feedback. Never ask what to do. Only tell them what you've done and only tell them why if they ask. A middle manager is only noticed when they are doing a bad job. There is no thanks, only blame. Is it a wonder nobody wants to do that job for free?

What we could really use is a PR manager, a education manager, and several managers for programmers. If we had an extra $400k a year, we could get 4 people willing to do the job on the cheap ($66k/yr). Of course we don't have an extra $400k a year.

And even if we did have middle management, a large fraction of our volunteers don't want to be managed. They want to do what they want to do, and if the project doesn't follow their lead, they'll take their ball and go home. Then you have the problem that you'll get 10 volunteers wanting to do the "fun" task and no one wanting to do the "hard" task. That's the unfortunate truth with most open source projects.

But that model also has its benefits. When I make changes to BOINC, I don't have to consult, I just do it and it's done. I don't have to ask an authority, because in the BOINC world, the projects are essentially middle management.

So here's the challenge... Be middle management. Find one of those problems you listed that you think has an achievable solution. Don't try to fix them all at once. Pare it down to something a team of a few people could accomplish. If it requires BOINC or SETI@home involvement, talk to me about it. Then find a few volunteers and get it done. Once it's done, nobody is going to say "no, don't do that." Unless it's bad for people who run BOINC, then 700,000 people may say "no, don't do that." And if it involves credit changes, there will be a large and vocal opposition regardless of what the change is.

I don't have personnel to offer. I can't help with daily or even weekly management. If you need a mailing list or a web site, that I can probably help with. If you want the word "official" I can give you that (for SETI@home at least).

Which do you think sounds better to upper management? "These are the problems you need to solve." --or-- "This was one of the problems you needed to solve. Here, I've solved it for you."

---

@SETIEric@qoto.org (Mastodon)

The page referenced in the link I posted below, will find a broken link to (the one named: "Paul's Benchmark Page") which contains several weeks worth of work that was one of our earliest expiriments.

It turns out I still have that "page", except it is not just one page, it is 149 objects, that creates a 10M zip ... if anyone is interested...

It is not terribly important, but it is too much for me to add to the Wiki, and I no longer have a web host I can put it on ...

if anyone is interested in hosting the page, well, I will send the zip ...

---

Hi Paul,

The excuse that science is hard and boring is so much bovine refuse.

Did someone actually use this excuse or are you paraphrasing? Science is easy.

Paraphrase ... But were do you clearly state what you are doing, and why, and what your results are to date ... and when was the last time that was updated, and before that?

I had years of prior BOINC experience under my belt and as I stated, coming back, nothing has changed ... even a CASUAL examination of the boards shows the same complaints and issues that were there two years ago.

What we could really use is a PR manager, a education manager, and several managers for programmers. If we had an extra $400k a year, we could get 4 people willing to do the job on the cheap ($66k/yr). Of course we don't have an extra $400k a year.

At one time there were quite a number of us clamoring for the opportunity to do things like this to be patted gently on the head and told to go away. That is first and foremost. Second, why does it have to be a paid position? Had you read carefully you should have noticed I pointed at one of the greatest untapped resources you have at your disposal ... students ... and not for the technical stuff ... that is either well in hand or it needs more time and specialization ...

What is the marketing effort for BOINC and the projects? Has it even been studied? If UCB doesn't have masters classes in management and marketing, one of the OTHER universities does ... why have we/you not solved the marketing problem by using it as a class exercise. I know when I taught having someone give me a wonderful teaching project was a gift from above. Here is a doozie... sell a bad product that is boring and hard to use and you have no budget ...

Oh, but there are other problems to solve and I am busy ...

But that is again the central point each project manager, and you have proved on exception, wants to ignore. Alone you each face the dragons ... alone you get swamped ...

And even if we did have middle management, a large fraction of our volunteers don't want to be managed. They want to do what they want to do, and if the project doesn't follow their lead, they'll take their ball and go home. Then you have the problem that you'll get 10 volunteers wanting to do the "fun" task and no one wanting to do the "hard" task. That's the unfortunate truth with most open source projects.

Very true.

And then there were others ... John did yeoman work on the scheduler, others have done work with application optimization ... and I, well, I was one of those that did the work that NO ONE ELSE wanted to do ... and I did it, I think, rather well ... not perfectly, but, rather well ...

Sadly, it was your own organization that was the one that insisted that it must have the final say ... in all aspects, even those not relating to your specific areas, that is, BOINC and SAH ... total control of content, style, scope, coverage, depth ... in fact, one of the suggestions was that I throw away several years worth of work and start over because it did not pass muster ...

So, sorry, been there, done that ...

And that struggle was responsible, at least in part, to me reaching this point where even were I interested in working on the documentation ... I could not ... even doing this is a strain ...

So here's the challenge... Be middle management.

I did, i did it without asking ... as I no longer have the database I have no idea of the size of the BOINC Wiki I started, but my starting website had over 200 pages of content ... if it has not been removed, every error message had it own individual page, both project specific and general ... again, been there, solved your problem ... and ... go away little boy and don't bother us was the general response from every project ... now, when it is midnight ... and too late ...

Which do you think sounds better to upper management? "These are the problems you need to solve." --or-- "This was one of the problems you needed to solve. Here, I've solved it for you."

Done ... see the unofficial BOINC wiki ... make it official ... Make it the official Wiki for SAH ...

Or, don't tell me that you accept solutions from outside the project ... or, you cannot do that because it is not perfectly done the way you want it done? Or is it too big? Or "insert excuse here" ...

The whole point of the wiki, as I stated below was so the projects could put their stuff in there, and other subject matter experts could amend, extend, explain, etc.

The biggest problem with most project "official" stuff is it is written so YOU understand it ... not so the public can understand it ... one of the more common project complaints about the Unofficial BOINC Wiki was that it was written in too relaxed of a style, you know, so it increases the possibility that an ordinary person can understand what the heck we are talking about ...

Anyway, this is a mountain I am not about to try to climb again ... I no longer have the strength to fight ...

And, no, just putting a link pointing there is not enough ... SAH says that this IS, as far as we are concerned the BOINC Wiki ... and when you document anything ... that is where you document it ...


Second, embrace the participant's rights and responsibilities ... tell the participants that they have certain guarentees by this project ... but that they have reciprocal responsibilities ...

Third, embrace the concept that we ARE a community ... and stop hiding ...

Maybe there are problems you are struggling with that someone out here could handle for you ... or at least help ...

Now you are going to explain why all of this is impractical ...

I don't know you, and maybe you are sincere, but, I already tried to help by solving a problem no one else wanted to touch ... and, well, my wife's reaction to seeing BOINC running on my systems was one of fear in that she knows what getting involved with the projects did to me the last time ...

So, I have tried to help you, and every other project with the problems you all want to pretend don't exist ...

Like why can't you hold onto your participants once they have joined ...

---

Evening Everyone

In my signature "Paul and Friends," stands for my respect for the efforts of Mr. Paul D Buck and others. Their efforts recognized and unrecognized have made some small impact on Seti and BOINC. Yes, there still is a ways to go.

Yes, I know I have a habit of upsetting people. That normally happens when I state things that are hard points. To Date I have not quit, I believe and am still doing what I can. Some days you win, most days you do not. Others are also doing very tough jobs besides their real job, they also are not getting paid for their time.

Right now I see a group of people standing side by side all pointing a finger in some direction. In Eric's post he ask if there was someone that would step up to help solve these issues. I know that Eric has asked for "volunteers" for various purposes in the past. So saying there are problems and then not volunteering on whatever level, well (to me personally) that is weak to say the least (Yes I am being hard). You could at least help to collect information, verify it and coordinate things. So deciding where you stand and if you are willing to help correct the issues... That is where it gets tough and You can have some small impact for the Users here and BOINC wide. You do not have to be a Scientist, only willing to help.

A final thought:
There are some that post here and have managed to get through some of the issues. They have a tag that states "volunteer developer" or "volunteer testers" some work on BOINC and Some work on Seti. I won't mention names I expect you to go find and see some of what they have to say.

Paul, Thank you for stopping back in. What I have seen you type is almost the same as your departure letter. The BOINC Community is larger and more people are starting to provide input. Some days you win and most days you don't. I feel happy that there are days that you do win!

So that it known, Astropulse is starting to come to life in Seti Beta.

Regards

Al

---

Please consider a Donation to the Seti Project.

And, I think you missed *MY* point in that I agree passionatly that credit is a motivator. If not THE motivator in that it is the only thing the participant gets out of virtually ALL projects (well, the eye-candy, maybe).

As far as Credit awards, parity, fairness, go back an look at some of my old posts ... I don't think that there were many others that were more passionate advocates of credit parity and fairness and the issues involved. I am too dispirited to search for it, though a quick search did not turn it up locally... but I had an initial design for a self-calibrating credit system that got rid of the artificial benchmark and the problems of optimized applications and optimized science applications ... and got laughed out of court and told that credit fairness was not an issue ...

Besides, credit is not real so it is not important ...


If I can work up the energy I will look in the Unofficial BOINC Wiki to see if I can find it ... I know I put it somewhere on-line ...

[edit2} see: improved...{/edit2}

I'll go have a read... Why do I have a feeling that "maximum verbosity == on" though? :-P

Edit: Yes, maximum verbosity is enabled... Too much to read tonight. I'll try tomorrow. Brief skimming showed a similar concept to what I said of having a set value for a single task across multiple projects and having each project provide a multiplier that took their tasks processing time and adjusted it to the normalized value.

For me it is all about the competition...across ALL projects (check my sig). I tell myself that all projects are working on equally valid research. Who am I to try any judge their relative merit? I'm just spreading the love! =;^)

However, I've come to the conclusion that credits are valid only *within* a project. Full stop. Cross-project credit parity is impossible, for many reasons we are all too familiar with. Any further effort trying to achieve that goal is a waste of time.

The only way to compare projects in any meaningful way, is with something like Formula BOINC, where RANK is compared. Not credits.

It took me several months to wrap my head around it. But now that I have, I am completely on board.

Additionally, I feel a "Formula BOINC"-type method is beneficial, as it pushes resources to smaller projects.

Finally, it even opens up cross project comparison to projects outside BOINC, which I think helps all DC, not just BOINC.

---

Dublin, California
Team: SETI.USA

To Eric,

This will be a short post, because fundamentally there are only a couple questions:

1) Is the loss of new participants after only a few work units are processed a concern at SAH?
2) Is the loss of old participants a concern at SAH?
3) Are you having problems getting help?

If the answer to any of those questions is yes ... then read carefully my older posts, and the new one...

If the answers are all no, don't waste your time ... nothing I have to say is of use or relevance.

And the reason I say carefully is that from your reply, I had to reply with essentially some of the same information I had already provided.

---

To Whom It May Concern:

Let me start out with the disclaimer. I am autistic, this is a weakness that can also contain strength. The weakness is that we lack finesse in dealing with people and they read, or hear, emotional content where there is none. The strength can be an ability like Rain Man being able to count the sticks before they hit the floor. Mine is visualization of systems, most specifically the problems within those systems. The weakness is that I never seem to be able to explain it so that the patient will take the medicine.

Some history; Pappa is right, I was one of the first people to use BOINC not the very first, but, I was in the end of the closed beta and I did help to develop the first BOINC web site. To me, BOINC is a baby I helped bring into this world.

And so, the most fundamental problem is, sorry, you. Not you Eric ... You a project manager ... You the BOINC project manager of each and every BOINC project. This is not an accusation nor a condemnation but, in my opinion, an observable fact.

Each and every one of you is so intent on the stovepipe that is your personal project, the tree if you will, that you have no time for the forest. And yet, if you are reading this, you know that your tree is in trouble. But, you will not lift your eyes to see that it is not just YOUR tree in trouble, but the whole forest. And so it is with the other project managers.

You hinted, or so it seemed to me, that I did not understand the issues of middle management, or of project management. I did not take insult, but, as a Senior Chief Petty Officer I was very definitely part of middle management. As a team lead on three separate database development projects I have familiarity with that arena as well ...

But history has demonstrated to me that most offers of assistance are rebuffed or refused. I don't know about the "new" bug base, but the old one ... well none of the bugs I put in got extinguished that I know of ... and one of the most common questions I could not answer was "Why isn't it the official wiki?" (Paraphrase)

I still cannot answer that question. But I can tell you what its exclusion told people then and probably still tells people now ... no matter how good the work ... it is not likely to be accepted by the projects ... And so, you wonder why you don't get volunteers?

Let us try another tack ... I mentioned that the action by the moderator raised my hackles a bit. Maybe their action was correct, maybe it was not ... but, to whom do I appeal? If there is a mechanism it sure was not apparent to me ... and even though I have only been here a week or so ... others have said to me that they to feel they have been misused by moderators... were they? I don't know ... and neither do you ... for all I know you will never see this post because a moderator will delete it ...

But here is the truth. When Predictor@Home deleted my account, they 'stole" ~171,000 CS from me. So to this day that work I did for them does not show up in my total. Did that make me leave the BOINC world? No, What made me leave was the realization that arbitrary action by a project against a participant could happen to anyone. I did attempt to resolve the matter privately and quietly, and I even still have the e-mails involved ... but the point is that the project, the project managers, the moderators ... they have all the power ... and there is no appeal ...

So, is Predictor@Home really isolated from SAH, and EAH, and CPDN?

No, because when they abused me ... and none of you would stand up for me ... you all lost me ... and what I could have done for you ... right now that is running at about 5K CS per day ... and I am so close once again to leaving ... because, even after two years nothing substantial has changed. In fact, it feels worse ...

"What does it feel like to live in fear ... that is what it is to be a slave" so said the man in Bladerunner.

No less true here ... will you also take umbrage at my post? Will SAH also delete my account and my earnings? What is there to stop you? What is my recourse if you do ... none of course ... I am only a participant ... a renewable resource ... except, maybe we are not as renewable as it would seem ...

My second to last action was to propose the first step in building a community of BOINC. A BOINCverse where we worked towards a common goal ... because what we have now are projects and a disorganized rabble of participants ... For years I did just what you said I should do... I handed you my part of the solutions to problems usually with a detailed design statement, or at least the start of one we could evolve. I was a systems engineer ... and I could document ... so that is what I did ... I identified problems, planned solutions, and documented the system as it was implemented. And on a few isolated instances I even made some code snippets ...

I got approbation from the user community and ignored by the projects ... or rejected, or insulted, sometimes a project managed to do all three at the same time which was a neat trick ...

What my experience was that outside help was not wanted or appreciated. I wish I could say it was only me, but I know of other efforts that, at best, were only partially successful. To my regret I cannot recall a single change or correction that I suggested that got implemented.

The participants live in a lawless jungle where giants stride ... and the giants neither notice the ants beneath them as the move about when they get in the way, or when they try to help. A vulgar metaphor perhaps, and maybe unduly harsh. But, continuing with the metaphor, the giants like this environment, because they live without constraint ... free to do as they please ... to make changes as you say, without having to talk to anyone ... how nice for you ...

Sometimes it takes a village ... I do not know of which occasions of which Pappa mentions where help was asked for and not received. I do know, that in my prior sojourn in this world, I never refused a projects request for help ... not once if it was within my ability to help ...

But, I am not a C coder ... nor trained in math, or optimization ... my forte is systems ... and I can see that the BOINC System is broken, but, and this is what nearly killed me the last time, and why I left; no project will take that first step that is needful to cure what ails the system... I saw these things years ago, and I see them still ... and I see the project all happily cocooned in the safety of their projects, isolated from the ills of this world.

Let us imagine a world where 3 to all 5 of the top earning projects were to suddenly recognize that they were members of a community that included not only themselves but thousands of participants. Some of them dying to help ... maybe even that project manager you need ... but how does he or she know that you even need one? But,even if we had one, are they coordinating a dictator's orders? Or are they coordinating a cooperative effort?

Yes, a project needs and deserves some autonomy ... but, they also have a responsibility to the community of project and to the participants that do the work. RIght now, a large percentage of participants probably feel that they have no input ... no chance to do anything more than process work. Granted, that is all many want ... but some of us wanted to give so much more ...

And so here we are once again ... as I sink deeper into depression because I once more see the futility of my effort ... of those that read, almost none understand ... of those that understand, none will act ...

And the question remains unanswered ... why should I stay? What is BOINC doing for me? If you cannot come up with an answer for the average person ... then ... that is why you are losing them ... In EverQuest, Sony says something like you are in our world now ... the world BOINC takes me to feels moribund without the life and vibrancy I once saw ... May I am just missing it, but I don't think so ... I have too many private messages that do not tell a happy story ... happily for my sanity I delete them on answering so I don't have lingering ghosts.

Most of the rest is in the other posts ... if there is life and excitement to be found in the BOINC world the tool sure did not tell me how to get there ... looking at my old haunts was certainly not very uplifting.

And once more, as to jumping in again to fix a problem ... I do not know how many times I made the offers ... and even for major agreed upon issues I was always told thanks for the offer, but no thanks ... maybe it is different now ... but, the Paul that could help died on the mountain trying ... and the feeling of futility that is rising from this effort to break through ... and failing once more ...

And so, for me, you, and those other project managers, are standing on the neck of a baby I helped bring into this world ... and I cannot seem to be able to save her ... and who likes to watch their baby die?

BOINC is certainly not thriving ... we were at a million something participants when I left two years ago ... at best you are treading water ...

---

Yay! At last I can post. Had to crunch some to get RAC...

I would also like to hear from the likes of Matt Lebofsky and Dr. Anderson...and see what they have to say too...

David Anderson doesn't follow SETI forums. (He doesn't even follow BOINC forums, so can't expect much.) I think he has only posted once at SETI.

---

Contribute to the Wiki!