On 10 Sep 2005 07:49:49 -0700, "Ben" <Klikos@Cogeco.ca> wrote:

I'm just saying that I preferred the old competitive method. Why
couldn't that have been incorporated into Boinc? I'm all for progress
and improvement.
Treacan

The problem with the old competitive method is that it is/was NOT a
level playing field! Some people CHEATED!!!! Some were caught and they
had some numbers taken away, but NOT ALL WERE CAUGHT! There is no way
to catch them all! Your numbers may have been real but other peoples
numbers WERE NOT!
There IS a new set of numbers in Boinc, one is called RAC or returned
average credit, it is kind of like a speedometer in that it shows the
rate at which your credits are being granted. There is also Total
Credit, which is what the name implies, the total number of credits
you have in a particular project. EVERYONE starts at zero on both and
goes up from there. The RAC flucuates depending on whether berkeley is
up and validating units but when it is up and running fine you will
get a good idea of how much of a  contribution you are making to the
whole. Obviously the faster or more machines you have the higher the
number.
Boinc has a MUCH more level playing field in that ALL results for a
particular unit are checked against a formula and the other people
that crunch your same unit. This means that if somone is cheating they
will likely get no credit for crunching that unit.