# Giving WCG stars based on math poll



## garyinhere (Nov 20, 2010)

*This thread is open for voting ONLY until 11/26. No posts/comments at all. Not for any reason! Any post/comment will result in deletion and an infraction. If you do not understand what this means, please send me a PM for clarification. Thank you!*

This thread is to vote and voice opinions on implementing the star reward system based on math. 

PvtCaboose1337 will give the details on how we arrived at these new numbers. I asked for his help because he is not biased on the issue, and I don't want Anyone to think that I am doing this for anyone but the team.

We did this to make a fair reward system. Please vote on what you think is fair, and comment on why you think it should be what you voted for.

*POLL WILL CLOSE FRIDAY NOV 26th AT 10PM EASTERN AND THREAD WILL BE LOCKED*


----------



## PVTCaboose1337 (Nov 20, 2010)

Gary asked for my help working out reasonable numbers that were not pulled from one's anus.  I can rationally prove these numbers below.  Take a look at the graph and read on.  







So what exactly are you looking at?

First off, I compiled the top 85 PPD earners and got the average PPD.  It came out to be about 3100, so I rounded to 3000.  Next I calculated the standard deviation.  This number came out to be 4200, so I added the two (raw) numbers together, and got around 7400.  Rounding to a more friendly 7500, I made this the max PPD to get 5 stars.  I then got the minimum PPD, and calculated a power function.  The function came out to be as shown on the graph.  After plugging in more numbers to get the 2, 3, and 4 star numbers, we came to our final numbers.  They are:

1: 500
2: 1500
3: 3000
4: 5000
5: 7500

These numbers are backed up by math.  If we take a small look at Ion's graph, we will see it does not follow any trend at all.  My graph follows a tailored polynomial function and I think it is an accurate depiction of what the new numbers should be.


----------



## Chicken Patty (Nov 20, 2010)

Guys,

Things were just made a little interesting.  If you make it too easy based on average nobody will ever stride for more output.  Ever since the badges went down now all of the sudden it's become a big isssue, people are harrasing other people because they can't match their output, etc.  So to end this, I will remove the stars.  I just thought it was a good way to make things competitive and fun but some of you just will never be happy.  So, before when nobody complained we had no stars, that's how it'll be again.  This way we can just continue to crunch on how we were before, unlike now where everybody tends to dislike everything.  Sorry fellas, but I just want the better for the team, right now it's not looking how I wanted it to look like.


----------



## theonedub (Nov 20, 2010)

Chicken Patty said:


> Guys,
> 
> Things were just made a little interesting.  If you make it too easy based on average nobody will ever stride for more output.  Ever since the badges went down now all of the sudden it's become a big isssue, people are harrasing other people because they can't match their output, etc.  So to end this, I will remove the stars.  I just thought it was a good way to make things competitive and fun but some of you just will never be happy.  So, before when nobody complained we had no stars, that's how it'll be again.  This way we can just continue to crunch on how we were before, unlike now where everybody tends to dislike everything.  Sorry fellas, but I just want the better for the team, right now it's not looking how I wanted it to look like.



Removing them would be the poorest decision of all. The numbers you used for the levels were poor to begin with and had no bearing other than they looked fine to you and a couple other people. These numbers have mathematical merit and still have numbers that are a challenge to meet- 3k, 5k and 7.5k is no walk in the park. Removing them would be doing the members here a disservice and, in my opinion, would be demonstrating poor leadership.


----------



## Chicken Patty (Nov 20, 2010)

theonedub said:


> Removing them would be the poorest decision of all. The numbers you used for the levels were poor to begin with and had no bearing other than they looked fine to you and a couple other people. These numbers have mathematical merit and still have numbers that are a challenge to meet- 3k, 5k and 7.5k is no walk in the park. Removing them would be doing the members here a disservice and, in my opinion, would be demonstrating poor leadership.



Was it poor leadership before?  Nobody complained before, everybody was happy and we were crunching along happily.  Why is this an issue now, that's what I fail to understand.


----------



## theonedub (Nov 20, 2010)

Before, the system was fine. It crashed, the requirements were changed, and we were given an opportunity to *improve it*. Obviously people aren't happy with the changes that were made, which I don't think is a surprise. No one really got a chance to convey their opinion.


----------



## Chicken Patty (Nov 20, 2010)

theonedub said:


> Before, the system was fine. It crashed, the requirements were changed, and we were given an opportunity to *improve it*. Obviously people aren't happy with the changes that were made, which I don't think is a surprise. No one really got a chance to convey their opinion.



The thing that I notice is that what might be an improvement to 500 people, might not be an improvement to 100.  Therefore regardless of what we do, not EVERYBODY will be happy.  So I think the best thing to do is to keep it to what it was before when at least NOBODY complained about the system.  As much as I understand that the above numbers have a mathematical merit, they will not keep every one happy, and nothing will.  The badges will return to normal, when everybody was just happy to be able to crunch.


----------



## theonedub (Nov 20, 2010)

How many people have voted they like the system as it is now? Zero. 

Even when we were rolling the 100k and 1 result per day OG system we wanted a new badge with designations like the F@H badges. We actually wanted that from the get go (look at the original thread about the idea of badges). 

So far I have only seen 2 people happy with the system as it is the creator (you), and the co-captain, Ion.


----------



## Chicken Patty (Nov 20, 2010)

theonedub said:


> How many people have voted they like the system as it is now? Zero.
> 
> Even when we were rolling the 100k and 1 result per day OG system we wanted a new badge with designations like the F@H badges. We actually wanted that from the get go (look at the original thread about the idea of badges).
> 
> So far I have only seen 2 people happy with the system as it is the creator (you), and the co-captain, Ion.



That's not exactly true.  It's true it was suggested by us, but we all know why this started apart from the few that didn't like the numbers to begin with.

Apparently you guys don't see the effort put into this?  I want the best for the team, instead of PM'ing me some ideas all that was done was bashing the stars system and doubt how "things are ran".  First off I think most people if not everybody took the wrong approach on how to discuss these things including you.  Now, having said that I ONLY WANT THE BEST FOR THE TEAM!

WHAT WILL EVERYBODY BE HAPPY WITH, LET'S JUST SETTLE THIS ONCE AND FOR ALL, PLEASE!!!!!!!!!!  I DON'T HOLD GRUDGE AGAINST NO ONE NOR AM I PISSED.  I JUST THINK THIS WAS MADE MUCH OF A BIGGER DEAL THAN IT WAS.

Now, please, tell me, what will keep everyone happy?  It really fucking stinks to wake up every morning, go to work, check TPU while all day at work, answer stuff on FB, PM's, and keep an eye on all threads to see you guys bashing away.  I barely have time for myself and all the hard work I put into this goes to shit.


----------



## theonedub (Nov 20, 2010)

Here's an idea, rather than posting in every WCG thread that this *proposed* system is already denied and canned lets see what comes of the thread and what other team members think?

I mean its the middle of the night/early morning and you are already kicking this idea to the curb less than 6hrs after it was created. That wasn't very sensible.


----------



## Solaris17 (Nov 20, 2010)

I like the system how it is. You get a badge based on if you give work. and a star per baseline. Its not a difficult concept. The baselines arent a figment of your imagination they are real. It doesnt matter if they were based off of mathematics they are still standards. Looking at IONs numbers I can see what he did. In fact Its so transparent I'm finding it hard that people dont under stand.

500 to get your foot in the door
1000 first important milestone.
2000 double original milestone.
4000 double second milestone.
12,000 Amazing achievement. 

anything over that and youve been part of the team so long you stray away from stupid arguments like this.

Now i understand people find things wrong with this system. but Lets play devils advocate.

based on this mathematics based approch. what happens in summer? when people drop for weeks at a time due to heat? the avrages will change. and the system will need to be changed to accomidate the slower progression because people will get mad that their shit dissapeared or that they arent getting the baslines fast enough because their "hard" in their situation. I personally would like to see a solid system were numbers are numbers and dont need to be changed when the environmental variables and dedication/ point output change. Thats a system you would need to modify multiple times a year. this one is never changing.


----------



## garyinhere (Nov 20, 2010)

It was to my understanding that the stars were not correct when they were implemented in the first place and it took this long to fix it. That is why nothing was said because the fix was in the works. Nobody was harassed or attacked, valid points were made about how one person is obtaining points and flaunting it in other's faces... several members have told him to chill out


----------



## Chicken Patty (Nov 20, 2010)

onedub & sol

see, onedub will be happy with the new system, sol will not.  See?  As onedub recommended, let's give it a few days to see what the votes say.


----------



## theonedub (Nov 20, 2010)

I would think that the system as it stands now would be more susceptible to environmental changes more than the proposed system.


----------



## garyinhere (Nov 20, 2010)

theonedub said:


> I would think that the system as it stands now would be more susceptible to environmental changes more than the proposed system.



I agree... the proposed system will even need to be adjusted from time to time as technology improves. It isn't flawless but it is fair!


----------



## Solaris17 (Nov 20, 2010)

theonedub said:


> I would think that the system as it stands now would be more susceptible to environmental changes more than the proposed system.



possibly. However a stationary baseline can also boost potential and confidence. as well as excitment when they are close to the goal. a non moving goal will and can give people the belife that they are reaching something. Which can drive people to push harder or longer. However with the proposed system needing to be adjusted frequently as I see it. can have the opposite effect. "meh my 580 died. Ill just buy a new car instead. I can just make up the points later when the standards are dropped for summer."




garyinhere said:


> I agree... the proposed system will even need to be adjusted from time to time as technology improves. It isn't flawless but it is fair!



I agree it is very fair. Its just the level of time and maintenence given to this points system is getting tiring. Not to mention changing it frequently will become bothersome. Time we should be spending on crunching.


----------



## Chicken Patty (Nov 20, 2010)

When do you guys think it would be a good deadline to choose which system stays?  two days, three days, etc?

I won't vote for one simple reason.  I'm in it for the research.  Sure milestones and the competition is fun, but whether I have ten stars or none, I'm happy to be a part of this.  Whether the old or proposed system stays, it won't change me.  So I'll leave it up to you guys to decide, not me.  This way there's not possibility that it can be "poor leadership" or anything along those lines.  I'm letting you guys decide, you got a better idea shoot me a PM.


----------



## Chicken Patty (Nov 20, 2010)

theonedub said:


> Here's an idea, rather than posting in every WCG thread that this *proposed* system is already denied and canned lets see what comes of the thread and what other team members think?
> 
> I mean its the middle of the night/early morning and you are already kicking this idea to the curb less than 6hrs after it was created. That wasn't very sensible.





Solaris17 said:


> possibly. However a stationary baseline can also boost potential and confidence. as well as excitment when they are close to the goal. a non moving goal will and can give people the belife that they are reaching something. Which can drive people to push harder or longer. However with the proposed system needing to be adjusted frequently as I see it. can have the opposite effect. "meh my 580 died. Ill just buy a new car instead. I can just make up the points later when the standards are dropped for summer."



I get what you are saying.  However, I don't think it should be adjusted in the summer.  I do understand mostly everybody drops production, but my point of view is that if you want to keep your stars, you gotta keep going at them hard.  Adjusting either system whether the proposed or the current one would not keep motivation up, my two cents at least.  As you said, when the standards are lowered, then people can make it up.


----------



## garyinhere (Nov 20, 2010)

I think by Friday everyone who cycles through the forums will have a chance to see the poll and vote... this was by no means an insult to you, but the team should have a voice. Ion doesn't speak for all of us.


----------



## Chicken Patty (Nov 20, 2010)

garyinhere said:


> I think by Friday everyone who cycles through the forums will have a chance to see the poll and vote... this was by no means an insult to you, but the team should have a voice. Ion doesn't speak for all of us.



Gary, in the badges thread, some agreed to the new system other than ION.  Not fair?  Well, I guess that's why we are here.  I appreciate the time you or anyone who contributed to the proposed system took, let's just leave it up to votes then.

If you can, add the deadline date to the first post.  That way people would know too and not come as surprise when decision is made.  Thanks.


----------



## Solaris17 (Nov 20, 2010)

garyinhere said:


> I think by Friday everyone who cycles through the forums will have a chance to see the poll and vote... this was by no means an insult to you, but the team should have a voice. Ion doesn't speak for all of us.



Agreed no disrespect to anyone. but im sure We are all man enough to dissagree and talk about something rather then flame and argue. We should leave the poll open and see what the community decides. Taking all possible outcomes into consideration before the final adjustments are made. This way we can all play fair trial and agree that it was talked about discussed and decided upon by majority so we can all stop bitching at some point in the near future. And with that good night gentlemen 5:00AM here just got out of work and another full day tomorrow.


----------



## garyinhere (Nov 20, 2010)

So know we have our good Captains blessing lets keep the posts on topic please! There should be no attacks made on Anyone!


----------



## theonedub (Nov 20, 2010)

Under PVTs system the top 9 members (out of about 75 returning work) would have the full 5. I think thats pretty good.


----------



## Chicken Patty (Nov 20, 2010)

theonedub said:


> Under PVTs system the top 9 members (out of about 75 returning work) would have the full 5. I think thats pretty good.



It does sound good to me.  I just like a system where it would impose more of a challenge.  But that's why I'm letting the public decide.  Guess we should have made a poll from the get go.


----------



## hat (Nov 20, 2010)

theonedub said:


> Removing them would be the poorest decision of all. The numbers you used for the levels were poor to begin with and had no bearing other than they looked fine to you and a couple other people. These numbers have mathematical merit and still have numbers that are a challenge to meet- 3k, 5k and 7.5k is no walk in the park. Removing them would be doing the members here a disservice and, in my opinion, would be demonstrating poor leadership.



I understand CP's frustration. As the team captain, he has to deal with all the bickering and arguing and try to please everyone. The system is fine as it is now, not everything has to mathematically sound.



theonedub said:


> Before, the system was fine. It crashed, the requirements were changed, and we were given an opportunity to *improve it*. Obviously people aren't happy with the changes that were made, which I don't think is a surprise. No one really got a chance to convey their opinion.



As I recall, there was enough bickering about the system the first time around. Today, someone got the idea to start round 2. We don't need all this arguing.



theonedub said:


> How many people have voted they like the system as it is now? Zero.
> 
> Even when we were rolling the 100k and 1 result per day OG system we wanted a new badge with designations like the F@H badges. We actually wanted that from the get go (look at the original thread about the idea of badges).
> 
> So far I have only seen 2 people happy with the system as it is the creator (you), and the co-captain, Ion.



I originally wasn't going to vote in the poll because I thought this resurgence of badge-bickering was ridiculous, but I decided to throw my two cents in, now that it seems the poll is getting attention, to re-affirm my position of "everybody shut the hell up and leave it alone".

:shadedshu

Why are we getting so worked up over some damned stars? Just leave it the way it is, and forget about it. Lock the thread and cast the key into the cracks of Mount Doom.


----------



## theonedub (Nov 20, 2010)

Some people are interested in them. If you aren't, thats great too, but let's not disregard the people who would like to see a little improvement.


----------



## Chicken Patty (Nov 20, 2010)

hat said:


> :shadedshu
> 
> Why are we getting so worked up over some damned stars? Just leave it the way it is, and forget about it. Lock the thread and cast the key into the cracks of Mount Doom.



When I came in to this thread for the first time I got so worked up at why all the flaming instead of just a regular discussion that I went ahead and completely denied this offer.  As I discussed with a few members via PM and I did apologize for taking that radical decision, I'm not perfect, neither is anyone else. I did have to understand one thing though, regardless of system/stars/badge, not every member on our team will be happy.  Not only us, even with any team.  Different people, different nationality, different attitude, etc.  There is just bound to be differences.  I figured it'll just be best to let the public decide, just like they choose presidents.  You think everybody was happy when Obama was chosen president?  No, but the public voted him.  Maybe not completely related to this, but you get what I'm trying to say.

If you disagree, I think you should really vote (if you haven't already) that's what the poll is for.  Let's discuss this as long as there is no flaming/arguing, please!


----------



## hat (Nov 20, 2010)

Chicken Patty said:


> When I came in to this thread for the first time I got so worked up at why all the flaming instead of just a regular discussion that I went ahead and completely denied this offer.



If I were captain, I would have stopped here. I wouldn't be willing to trade "a little improvement" for another round of bickering. I suppose you're a better man than I, as I wouldn't have all the patience for it.  From here on I'll just sit back and let this run its course, I've already expressed my views.


----------



## Chicken Patty (Nov 20, 2010)

hat said:


> If I were captain, I would have stopped here. I wouldn't be willing to trade "a little improvement" for another round of bickering. I suppose you're a better man than I, as I wouldn't have all the patience for it.  From here on I'll just sit back and let this run its course, I've already expressed my views.



Naw, don't think anybody is better than anybody.  We ALL appreciate your opinion on this.  As long as it's kept in this type of civilized manner, it's all good.


----------



## W1zzard (Nov 20, 2010)

hat said:


> If I were captain, I would have stopped here. I wouldn't be willing to trade "a little improvement" for another round of bickering



imagine how i feel, getting smart advice from everybody about everything


----------



## Radical_Edward (Nov 20, 2010)

PVTs proposal looks about right. 

Gary and I were talking about this earlier on team speak and while I agree that the system isn't perfect, it's at what it is now partly due to my fault. (I remember I was one of the ones discussing the points thing from before in the old thread.)  

Yes, I guess I would like to see the requirements lowered a bit, as I thought I got more PPD than I really do. But honestly it really doesn't matter too much. What does matter is that the work packets get done for the projects. 

One thing I do agree with the most is, some people brag way too much about their PDD in the TPU/WGC thread about stuff that isn't really theirs. Yes, I understand it's exciting and all, but we don't need to hear about it every dang day.


----------



## [Ion] (Nov 20, 2010)

PVTCaboose1337 said:


> ~snip~
> These numbers are backed up by math.  If we take a small look at* Ion's graph,* we will see it does not follow any trend at all.  My graph follows a tailored polynomial function and I think it is an accurate depiction of what the new numbers should be.


First of all, the fuck is this???

This is not "Ion's graph".  I did not come up with these numbers.  I've been advocating them the entire time because they simply make sense.  It's not hard to get the first few stars, but the last ones are certainly more difficult and will be a challenge?


Solaris17 said:


> I like the system how it is. You get a badge based on if you give work. and a star per baseline. Its not a difficult concept. The baselines arent a figment of your imagination they are real. It doesnt matter if they were based off of mathematics they are still standards. Looking at IONs numbers I can see what he did. In fact Its so transparent I'm finding it hard that people dont under stand.
> 
> 500 to get your foot in the door
> 1000 first important milestone.
> ...


I'm going to stress again, I didn't come up with these numbers.  In fact, the numbers you have here aren't the current ones.  I think that I'd like to see the req for the 4th star higher (~6k) so there isn't such a huge gap between 4 and 5, but other than that, it looks good 


Solaris17 said:


> possibly. However a stationary baseline can also boost potential and confidence. as well as excitment when they are close to the goal. a non moving goal will and can give people the belife that they are reaching something. Which can drive people to push harder or longer. However with the proposed system needing to be adjusted frequently as I see it. can have the opposite effect. "meh my 580 died. Ill just buy a new car instead. I can just make up the points later when the standards are dropped for summer."
> 
> I agree it is very fair. Its just the level of time and maintenence given to this points system is getting tiring. Not to mention changing it frequently will become bothersome. Time we should be spending on crunching.


Agreed 100% with this.  I think it would be far better just to have a non-changing system that isn't based on what people get currently.  Maybe update it every year or so if we have a big boost in overall PPD 


garyinhere said:


> I think by Friday everyone who cycles through the forums will have a chance to see the poll and vote... this was by no means an insult to you, but the team should have a voice. *Ion doesn't speak for all of us*.




Well clearly, but I'm representing the original requirements of the star system because I *fundamentally think it makes sense*


theonedub said:


> Under PVTs system the top 9 members (out of about 75 returning work) would have the full 5. I think thats pretty good.


There certainly is logic to a system like this.


W1zzard said:


> imagine how i feel, getting smart advice from everybody about everything


----------



## Velvet Wafer (Nov 20, 2010)

maybe we should rename the thread: "giving WCG stars based on bitching"...
for something that supposedly should have been fun, i fail to see the fun here.

And if Ion has the possibility to lent the rigs, let him have it. you know how old he is, and how much he can afford. 
Besides the fact, that he will not crunch forever there,
if you dont let him have it, and bitch constantly about it, then there is a name for ir:
Greed.

not a positive feeling id rather not submit myself to.


----------



## PVTCaboose1337 (Nov 20, 2010)

[Ion] said:


> First of all, the fuck is this???
> 
> This is not "Ion's graph".  I did not come up with these numbers.  I've been advocating them the entire time because they simply make sense.  It's not hard to get the first few stars, but the last ones are certainly more difficult and will be a challenge?



I was under the impression you came up with those numbers.  Sorry for the confusion.  

I believe that I am an unbiased source however, and feel that my work speaks for itself.  I don't do WCG, so I'm not favoring any side.  I go entirely off the math.  I purposely made each star harder than the last, just not as hard as you did.  On your proposed numbers, after 3 stars, the slope goes way up, meaning that it is much harder to attain.  Mine steadily increases.  In addition, I took the standard deviation, meaning that from the center, we should not have a maximum for than 7300.  I rounded to 7500, so it is already too high.  Making the uber achievement 12k is something almost nobody can reach, maybe 5 people.  

So in summary:

-I am unbiased
-My numbers were created solely by using math
-I can back up my numbers with math
-My math is correct
-My numbers are reasonable and make sense


----------



## Black Panther (Nov 20, 2010)

I admit I'm confused.

Is the 'old way' the method we are using now?


_____

I had originally been happy with the old way when I started crunching last February. However it was a tad unfair since it gave a cruncher's badge to users who had achieved a certain number of points and had since then moved to another team or quit crunching altogether.

The way it is now at least gives credit to actual crunchers crunching under the TPU team and I'm happy with that.

So... does this need changing? Again?


----------



## theonedub (Nov 20, 2010)

Velvet Wafer said:


> maybe we should rename the thread: "giving WCG stars based on bitching"...
> for something that supposedly should have been fun, i fail to see the fun here.



Everyone, for the most part, is being civil about this so dont come in here and start calling the people with concerns whiners or bitchers. Its not as if the people who aren't happy abandoned the team or stopped crunching. Everything is business as normal as we work this out like people with sense.


----------



## AlienIsGOD (Nov 20, 2010)

I didnt vote because theres no option for IDC either way...

PS.  if the stars can be updated, why cany we just have the badge with like a 500PPD/28day average.  That way current members can keep the badge, and pplz who decide to leave lose it for not keeping the 28day/PPD min.


----------



## Chicken Patty (Nov 20, 2010)

W1zzard said:


> imagine how i feel, getting smart advice from everybody about everything



I feel ya bro. I PM you every two seconds about this.   But this will be final, so hang in there buddy.  If I was in your area I'd definitely have to take you out for a few rounds.


----------



## garyinhere (Nov 20, 2010)

Black Panther said:


> Is the 'old way' the method we are using now?



Yes BP currently your stars are on the old/current system. Not the proposed one.


----------



## mjkmike (Nov 21, 2010)

Nice to see the team has passion.  Stars or no stars I will keep crunching for TPU you are all Friends and I will not let you down.


----------



## 4x4n (Nov 21, 2010)

I voted for the new way, but would be fine with just a plain badge. I'm all for motivating and competition, but don't forget about the little guy with just on old P4. Everyone contributing should be appreciated.


----------



## GREASEMONKEY (Nov 21, 2010)

AlienIsGOD said:


> I didnt vote because theres no option for IDC either way...



Same boat here!


----------



## Sadasius (Nov 21, 2010)

It did not matter either way but I like to keep people happy. A happy cruncher is a productive one. Heck I would say add another 10 stars if it makes people feel happy and would get them crunching more for the team. That is all I care about. They want stars, give them up. Not like they cost anything or charge per star at ISP's. Heck if it meant people would crunch more I would put a pair of boobs on the stars too or something...  I know when I was a kid we had a star system in grade school. If someone lost stars it was as if you shot the kid. If they make people happy then I don't see a problem.


----------



## Chicken Patty (Nov 21, 2010)

Sadasius said:


> It did not matter either way but I like to keep people happy. A happy cruncher is a productive one. Heck I would say add another 10 stars if it makes people feel happy and would get them crunching more for the team. That is all I care about. They want stars, give them up. Not like they cost anything or charge per star at ISP's. Heck if it meant people would crunch more I would put a pair of boobs on the stars too or something...  I know when I was a kid we had a star system in grade school. If someone lost stars it was as if you shot the kid. If they make people happy then I don't see a problem.



The real debate was though that the requirements for each star was too high or just didn't make sense.  Although it does to some, and not to some, or mathematically etc.  PVT actually went ahead and based some off math which is the one in the 2nd post.  If at the deadline that method got more votes, then it'll replace the current one, or vice versa. 

NOTE:  Boobs on the badge would be great


----------



## Sadasius (Nov 21, 2010)

Chicken Patty said:


> The real debate was though that the requirements for each star was too high or just didn't make sense.  Although it does to some, and not to some, or mathematically etc.  PVT actually went ahead and based some off math which is the one in the 2nd post.  If at the deadline that method got more votes, then it'll replace the current one, or vice versa.
> 
> NOTE:  Boobs on the badge would be great



Well if makes people happy then lower the requirement for stars. Not everyone is going to have 5 or 6 rigs to crunch on. It's better to have a million crunchers with one rig then a couple thousand with many rigs. I can understand some people would like to feel extra proud they have many rigs and have *earned* extra stars. Maybe add a nice red star to those that went that extra mile or something. That way both sides are dancing.


----------



## Solaris17 (Nov 21, 2010)

Sadasius said:


> Well if makes people happy then lower the requirement for stars. Not everyone is going to have 5 or 6 rigs to crunch on. It's better to have a million crunchers with one rig then a couple thousand with many rigs. I can understand some people would like to feel extra proud they have many rigs and have *earned* extra stars. Maybe add a nice red star to those that went that extra mile or something. That way both sides are dancing.



this is amazing ^ change star color based on active systems? though thats a whole other argument.


----------



## FordGT90Concept (Nov 21, 2010)

I think it shouldn't be based on points per day because that fluctuates wildly every day.  A different metric should be used like total hours or total points contributed.


----------



## garyinhere (Nov 21, 2010)

FordGT90Concept said:


> I think it shouldn't be based on points per day because that fluctuates wildly every day.  A different metric should be used like total hours or total points contributed.



Daily PPD's were used to get the average points of active members. The stars can be based on a 7 day average ppd or bi monthly or monthly... that part is up to CP and Wizzard, whatever is best to do


----------



## PVTCaboose1337 (Nov 21, 2010)

Chicken Patty said:


> PVT actually went ahead and based some off math which is the one in the 2nd post.



Yeah I actually did.  And the math is correct.  Work it out guys if you don't believe me!  

However, going off PPD however might be a mistake.  Total points is much simpler, never has to be changed as hardware progresses, and overall would be easier to she show.  I don't know what the stars actually mean at this point.  The folders have a good system.  You can see how many points they have, the exception being "crazy folder" which means that person has a shit-ton.


----------



## garyinhere (Nov 21, 2010)

PVTCaboose1337 said:


> However, going off PPD however might be a mistake. Total points is much simpler, never has to be changed as hardware progresses, and overall would be easier to she show



Well even GPU-Z needs updated from time to time... nobody has the kind of magic your look'n for


----------



## t77snapshot (Nov 21, 2010)

hat said:


> I understand CP's frustration. As the team captain, he has to deal with all the bickering and arguing and try to please everyone. The system is fine as it is now, not everything has to mathematically sound.
> 
> 
> As I recall, there was enough bickering about the system the first time around. Today, someone got the idea to start round 2. We don't need all this arguing.
> ...



I agree with everything hat said here and in a way did not want to bump this thread because I hate watching my fellow crunching friends discussing this star issue.  I do agree thay PVT's system works better, but I don't feel it needs to be done. Not every bodyin this world can happy all at once. Before the stars everyone was peachy.


----------



## Velvet Wafer (Nov 22, 2010)

before the stars, there was no "rank" besides captain and since a short time, also "co-captain"... but with there stars, people start to think they are not good enough as crunchers, because others may have more stars. but, thats clearly not right, because its all still the same as before 

I have 3 stars, but i still support the old model, simply because its more challenging. 
hate me for it, but in this case, im not the friend of the mathemathical model


----------



## PVTCaboose1337 (Nov 22, 2010)

t77snapshot said:


> I do agree thay PVT's system works better



Ok I'm gonna take that out of context and say: 

/thread


----------



## garyinhere (Nov 22, 2010)

PVTCaboose1337 said:


> Ok I'm gonna take that out of context and say:
> 
> /thread



I specifically asked for opinions so don't be closed minded. We are a team regardless of stars or no stars or the new way vs. the old. If you close your mind you can learn nothing!


----------



## t77snapshot (Nov 22, 2010)

PVTCaboose1337 said:


> Ok I'm gonna take that out of context and say:
> 
> /thread



my bad....I guess I am a bit confused....I will leave this thread and never return.


----------



## garyinhere (Nov 22, 2010)

t77snapshot said:


> my bad....I guess I am a bit confused....I will leave this thread and never return.



this is your team! NOT HIS... what TEAM MEMBERS have to say is valid and important regardless if it is for or against the new system


----------



## t77snapshot (Nov 22, 2010)

garyinhere said:


> this is your team! NOT HIS... what TEAM MEMBERS have to say is valid and important regardless if it is for or against the new system



Don't be getting crazy on me gary

I support this team with all my heart and have respect for everyone, I agree with hat and that is my 2cents.


----------



## Bow (Nov 22, 2010)

Just get rid of the damn stars


----------



## erocker (Nov 22, 2010)

hat said:


> Why are we getting so worked up over some damned stars? Just leave it the way it is, and forget about it. Lock the thread and cast the key into the cracks of Mount Doom.



I couldn't agree more. If people are getting upset or worked up over this, it's time to think of why you do this in the first place. Keep cool now.


----------



## theonedub (Nov 22, 2010)

I don't think that anyone who wants this system altered has lost track of the larger picture (frankly I think that's insulting). We just want the numbers adjusted to a more realistic amount. 

I think its annoying that people who admittedly don't care either way make it seem like its stupid to want the system to change. You guys think its fine to dismiss their concerns over something they actually care about? If you guys don't care, let the people that do have their changes.


----------



## erocker (Nov 22, 2010)

theonedub said:


> I don't think that anyone who wants this system altered has lost track of the larger picture (frankly I think that's insulting). We just want the numbers adjusted to a more realistic amount.
> 
> I think its annoying that people who admittedly don't care either way make it seem like its stupid to want the system to change. You guys think its fine to dismiss their concerns over something they actually care about? If you guys don't care, let the people that do have their changes.



That's the whole thing though, what does it really matter? What makes any difference for the causes your are crunching for? What is so important that the current system needs to change? The first question of the poll: "Do you think the current system is fair?" Fair? For who? For what? Recognition? Fame? The wantingness to fit in? Crunch already. My opinion is to just get rid of the badges as anyone who really wants to crunch/fold/whatever does so to contribute to a good cause and shouldn't/wouldn't be concerned to some pixels on a screen under their username.


----------



## garyinhere (Nov 22, 2010)

Here's how a reward system works.





You get a star for a good job done... leading you to want to get more stars!


----------



## theonedub (Nov 22, 2010)

There are plenty of forums that have badge systems that work and are reasonable. I think the people here @ TPU are more than capable of developing a system that works just as well, if not better. 

Second, people were crunching for this team when badges were just a twinkle in some serves hard drive. The badges are just a little extra for those who participate- not a reason to participate.


----------



## PVTCaboose1337 (Nov 22, 2010)

garyinhere said:


> Here's how a reward system works.
> http://img.techpowerup.org/101121/Capture24.png
> You get a star for a good job done... leading you to want to get more stars!



Gary, is that how you trained your kids bro?  I think that might work here too!  The "I can do it WCG Chart!"  In photoshop now...


----------



## PVTCaboose1337 (Nov 22, 2010)

Voila!

The "I Can WCG Chart."  I expect all members to fill this out ASAP.  It is important to know how well everyone is doing.  Keep your star chart up to date!


----------



## garyinhere (Nov 22, 2010)

The Badges don't mean a thing for me except to help identify me with the team for people needing help. I wanted this new system to help keep people "hooked on crunching" so to speak. I have deleted my badges because I'm a Proud member of this team. They will stay deleted regardless of what happens. I don't do it for a badge. I have asked for the thread to be closed. We are a team and shouldn't be fighting like this, so i believe this is the best choice.*Chicken Patty will decide what to do from here, he is the Captain and I know he will lead us in the right direction.*


----------



## PaulieG (Nov 23, 2010)

No more comments in this section. It is only open for voting. Please see the OP for clarification. Thanks!


----------



## PaulieG (Nov 24, 2010)

Bump for voting only.


----------



## PaulieG (Nov 25, 2010)

Bump for voting only!


----------



## PaulieG (Nov 26, 2010)

Bump for voting only! So far, it looks dead even, and certainly not looking like there is some major revolt against the current system. I will keep the thread open for just voting until Sunday night.


----------

