Massman

Didn't see this thread before, so HAPPY New year everyone ! (you too Stummerwinter )

If you're benching with your gpu's, you should upload the results of 3D benchmarks

Yeap, pleasing everyone if pretty much undoable, however that does not mean that we should not stop rethinking rules and guidelines. HWBot is still very young as a bencher's platform and we still have to get rid of a few faults we couldn't think of in these 12-15 months. First of all, we are of course only interested in the skill of the bencher, not in the size of his wallet and I can follow your thoughts perfectly. However, I have some remarks: - We're not against buying and selling hardware, not at all, in despite of what you might think when reading the serial number idea. The idea is still just an idea and before we could even think of using it, we must work around some issues like you've mentioned (golden chips are sold to one another). - Lending chips and cards to fellow benchers seems very harmless and is in fact very natural. But, how would you feel if one day you have the second place in one category and the next week you're sixth, just because the one golden chip has been lend out to five members from the same team? - Your solution on above problem is a good solution, absolutely, but doesn't fit HWBot's intial policy when creating the hardware points, namely presenting a place where both the big shots ánd the little guys could bench together. We want to encourage those who only have 20 points to keep benching for the team. If you change the team's points rules to "only points for the best score", the little guys will have no challenge anymore. Monstru, please write down your ideas and contact me somehow as most of your ideas are very very good .

No, not correct here . The quote you are referring to is about sponsored stuff provided by a manufacturer to 1 person. If someone benched 3D at Hipro's lab with Hipro's videocards the result belongs to Hipro. That's the reason why I asked to specify who owns the hardware. Gorillakos, if you read this, drop me a message on MSN, need to ask something .

Actually, HWBot (well ... Mbot as it was named then) started as a forum league ... but that completely off topic.

As Intel has lend you that rig for review, it's your property for that week. All bench results are your property as well, so there's no problem in submitting those results

That is in fact a very clever idea . Good thinking! Second question has a positive response - Yes, the owner is (in this case) the person to who the cpu has been given to (for review or benches or anything else).

No one is trying to decrease HOT's points at all. The crew (and other users) just wondered how it's possible that so many members of one team score that high with pretty much the same setup. We have set a few ground rules regarding team runs and hardware sharing and those must be respected in any way. We have seen in the last few days/weeks that these rules are not covering all bases, so we're rewriting those again. Can we be 100% sure that someone is not respecting those rules? No. We will always partially rely on what the users submit and always need to be careful when handling this kind of situations. That's why we did not block the results right away and tried to contact the users first. I understand your background as a lawyer and I fully understand the principles of "innocent until proven guilty", but ... how on earth are we EVER going to provide evidence when we're not attending the bench session? We have to rely on what we see and try to make the correct conclusion. In fact, it should be really easy for us: if no user did something that can be seen as suspicious, we won't need result moderators. But sometimes we have certain circumstances in which users are confused by the rules or submit a wrong result by accident or even try to abuse hwbot to to gain more respect. These are the situation in which WE have to ask to the users what's happening . (btw: this is purely theory and none of these lines are referring to HOT!) This last point can be in bold: WHY do people think -ONCE AGAIN- that HWBot is biased by certain forums???. For once and for all, HWBot is impartial when it comes to deciding what results should be considered suspicious. If people have ideas of how the rules can be improved, you can always let us know. To get back on topic: waiting untill Hipro is back from 3DMarking () and answer my last question.

Sorry to not have fixed these, but I'm in the middle of my exams and I still have a lot to do. will try to fix this asap.

What does Elefsinaras and Giorgios th. own then? Good luck with you WR attempts

You pay start with the GF88 and X29 and yorkies, I reckon that will already take a while

So, can you tell me who owns what hardware?

Benching with the exact same hardware (for 3D: the exact same vga's and for 2d: the exact same cpu) is indeed illegal as stated in the article about the new subteam rules.

We're currently working on a set of improved rules as we have noticed that sponsored hardware / team hardware is really making thing a lot more difficult. I hear what your problem is (and I assume you can understand why this is a problem for us), but at this moment I have yet to find a solution for this issue. Question: You're talking about "we won". Is the hardware property of the team?

Yea, as soon as I find the time I will have a look at it. Thanks for the heads up!

A few years ago I had 200+, but lots of them were not legal copies

The resolution of the benchmark is not visible in the screenshot, so we have no way of being sure that you have use the standard resolution.

Fixed

Fixed

Fixed

Which ones exactly?

The crew already has this feature (to test) SOOOO wait for the next update of hwbot

What?

Not yet

Working on it