HWBOT Rev.4 - The Plan.

[romdominance]

-sigh-

 

Why are you and your team mates always trying to make everything look so controversial? Every single opinion that does not line up with your thoughts are seen as "idiotic", "corporate machine" or "just to piss us off".

 

I'm really not grasping the importance of you using the words "corporate puppet". It's as simple as: either we can do this full-time and give you something, or we can't and can give you nothing ... I'm not sure how it works in your neighbourhood, but I just can't buy bread with fictional air-money. The amount of request for the actual development on HWBOT has reached a stage where it's impossible for Frederik to do even 10% of it in his free time (or night time), so it's an absolute necessity to find resources to keep this site running.

 

Are we bad guys for asking money from MFCs? The alternative is that we're charging the overclocking community for keeping this site running ... is that the best alternative then?

 

You always make it look as if the ONLY alternative is that no one should be paid and all features must be added within a short time-frame. That's just not possible ...

 

I think you have lost sight of what your site's purpose once was. Overclocking is about achieving the best possible result with a particular group of hardware, and being rewarded for you effort. As soon as you remove the reward or recognition in an attempt to appease the masses, you will loose most if not all of your support. The concept of devaluing the best product and the best overclocker in the equation, goes against the very concept of overclocking. See the paradox?

[Massman]

I understand not wanting to be a pay site, and i understand that this sort of thing costs money to run.

Despite that, this is HWBot, not GigaMSIDataBOT, isn't it? I'm rather strongly opposed to this changing from By Overclocks For Overclockers to By Manufacturers For Marketing.

If that means no development beyond what people donate in their spare time, so be it.

(EDIT: Reading massman's post above, i guess i'm in the minority here, be realistic people!).

 

The key point is here, however, that all changes we make are like "by overclockers for overclockers"

 

The overclocking world has become very complex and manufacturer overclocking will be part of it from now on. We can either sit in the corner and cry all night long, or can think of ways to embrace manufacturers and their wish to use overclocking as marketing. Ignoring MFCs would actually be the least intelligent thing to do, even from an overclocker for overclocker point of view. This revision is actually all about giving manufacturers a separate playground so that the normal people can return to a quiet playground again .

 

As for the donating part. Thing is: there's still a huge hole to cover from the past 5 years of investment (when there was no income); if that continues, HWBOT will simply not continue ... it's not very smart to keep a costly website running if there's nothing that covers the costs. Also, if there's no software developper, no bugs will be solved (free time is needed and when you have a high pressure coding job + kids running around, time is limited).

 

I really wish you could see all the bills and bank accounts and the actual time available for coding; it would probably make things a lot more clear.

[ryba AICooling]

There will be done what need to be done

 

Guys, stop fightning with Massman! If you don't stop doing that in 5 minutes, Piter will lost at least his lan cable or maybe laptop I need take a rest!

[rickss69]

"Are we bad guys for asking money from MFCs? The alternative is that we're charging the overclocking community for keeping this site running ... is that the best alternative then?"

 

 

So this means if we (the dirty masses) contribute enough to keep the site solvent then the majority vote gets enacted?

[der8auer]

Come on Massman The way you answer just looks to me like "HWBOT Rev.4 - The Plan" is more like "HBOT Rev.4 - FINAL, non discussable"... This is really disappointing to me.

 

What about a big vote where the community has the choice of the different aspects of rev4? Like:

- I like a split of the cooling Methods

- I don't like a split of the cooling Methods

- I like that only the best submission counts to Team-Total

- I don't like that only the best submission counts to Team-Total

.

.

.

Would be great.

 

Selfquote FTW

 

Massman could you please comment the discussions about the "best submission only counts to Team-Total" thing?

[Mr.Scott]

"Are we bad guys for asking money from MFCs? The alternative is that we're charging the overclocking community for keeping this site running ... is that the best alternative then?"

 

 

So this means if we (the dirty masses) contribute enough to keep the site solvent then the majority vote gets enacted?

We'll give you what you want......if you pay us. It doesn't get any plainer than that man.

[ARandomOWL]

I bench for my team not myself..

 

This.

 

If this new rule applies, then THAT's a message for us small folks to stop competing since we don't get any team points for our submissions. And if that happens, I might as well stop even trying and delete my profile.

 

 

And this.

 

Also, Massman. Most of the time your attitude in this forum really disgusts me.

 

I don't think I have a future as a member of HWbot.

[Hollywood]

I think you have lost sight of what your site's purpose once was. Overclocking is about achieving the best possible result with a particular group of hardware, and being rewarded for you effort. As soon as you remove the reward or recognition in an attempt to appease the masses, you will loose most if not all of your support. The concept of devaluing the best product and the best overclocker in the equation, goes against the very concept of overclocking. See the paradox?

 

That's one of the best post's in this thread.

BTW i like to know how much money is needed to keep this side up and running?

And: I would not mind to pay for using this side.

A while back, i was rly active in onlinegaming.

Our community needed to have a webside for storage maps and other stuff.

I paid and i am still paying the fees for the side.

Even if i am not active in that community anymore.

So i guess it's not wrong to pay for something like hwbot.

[Massman]

Instead of saying you're doing what you're doing to control the amount of cheats and sharing on the site, why don't you just come clean and say that the small time OC'ers don't fit your long term corporate sponsored goals anymore, instead of just quietly instituting change after change to alienate them, and stringing them along.

 

You're not giving me an alternative here: you're simply stating that if I don't say what you insinuate, I'm not clean. And if I am clean, I'd say what you insinuate.

 

I guess it's always easy to see the dark side of things and don't look at the bright side. People will always have something to complain about ... but if you would look closely at the Rev4, you might actually notice that we're doing A LOT to keep the small time overclockers happy. If you don't want to see it, you will not see it, however.

 

I think you have lost sight of what your site's purpose once was. Overclocking is about achieving the best possible result with a particular group of hardware, and being rewarded for you effort. As soon as you remove the reward or recognition in an attempt to appease the masses, you will loose most if not all of your support. The concept of devaluing the best product and the best overclocker in the equation, goes against the very concept of overclocking. See the paradox?

 

No.

 

There would be a paradox IF we'd start to reward people for not achieving the best result. What this concept is, however, is rewarding people for not choosing an 'easy' way (buy popular hardware) but support the team with different hardware. We reward the best result.

 

FYI, the concept of overclocking is not getting a reward. The concept of overclocking is having fun.

 

So this means if we (the dirty masses) contribute enough to keep the site solvent then the majority vote gets enacted?

 

-sigh-

 

You make it sound as if we never listen and just do whatever we want. We listen to feedback, then return to our design/concept and see how we can implent stuff. It requires COMPROMISES.

 

Hence why not everything is always as you want it to be.

[ryba AICooling]

Ohhh Piter, don't set rev.4! I will kill my self in that case when I loose my point in new engine Please make it for community and save the world again!

[OptyTrooper]

-sigh-

 

Why are you and your team mates always trying to make everything look so controversial? Every single opinion that does not line up with your thoughts are seen as "idiotic", "corporate machine" or "just to piss us off".

 

I'm really not grasping the importance of you using the words "corporate puppet". It's as simple as: either we can do this full-time and give you something, or we can't and can give you nothing ... I'm not sure how it works in your neighbourhood, but I just can't buy bread with fictional air-money. The amount of request for the actual development on HWBOT has reached a stage where it's impossible for Frederik to do even 10% of it in his free time (or night time), so it's an absolute necessity to find resources to keep this site running.

 

Are we bad guys for asking money from MFCs? The alternative is that we're charging the overclocking community for keeping this site running ... is that the best alternative then?

 

You always make it look as if the ONLY alternative is that no one should be paid and all features must be added within a short time-frame. That's just not possible ...

 

Seriously? It's not as if WE are the only ones opposed to this change. I for one apologize for implying that your in for the $ as it were. However it can't be denied that this move appears to be driven largely by said $. Those that afford to swap hardware every hour/day what have you or receive free hardware are going to benefit form this and the small guys REGARDLESS of the team are going to suffer. It appears at this point that a vast majority of those who have weighed in are opposed to this change or parts there of. If you do not take that into serious consideration then you do yourself an injustice and the community as a whole the same.

[rickss69]

-sigh-

 

"You make it sound as if we never listen and just do whatever we want. We listen to feedback, then return to our design/concept and see how we can implent stuff. It requires COMPROMISES."

 

Hence why not everything is always as you want it to be.

 

You read quiet a bit into one sentence Massman...and you did not address the question directly.

[Massman]

Selfquote FTW

 

Massman could you please comment the discussions about the "best submission only counts to Team-Total" thing?

 

Voting doesn't always work. Just think about the fact that a lot of our members don't really have a good understanding of english and might not be able to understand the question correctly.

 

FYI, you guys do realize that this team-thing has been discussed within HWBOT as well, right? It's not as if this thing was just written and posted .

 

It's actually the best way to solve hardware sharing, which is one of the biggest sources of discussion in the last couple of months. It's also one of the very few workable solutions that doesn't require pictures, videos and bank receipts as validation. I am open for all suggestions on this topic (apart from the "change back to rev2" ) ... I'd really like to have less cheat accusations.

[TaPaKaH]

The overclocking world has become very complex and manufacturer overclocking will be part of it from now on. We can either sit in the corner and cry all night long, or can think of ways to embrace manufacturers and their wish to use overclocking as marketing. Ignoring MFCs would actually be the least intelligent thing to do, even from an overclocker for overclocker point of view. This revision is actually all about giving manufacturers a separate playground so that the normal people can return to a quiet playground again

Fair enough, let manufacturers have their UFL corner and leave everyone else alone with all the other "brand new features".

I don't understand your logic - you complain about the complexity and cost of adding features, yet you want to introduce the whole new user/team scoring algorythm when majority is happy with the existing one

 

EDIT:

Since we're getting good feedback on the plan

this plus all above - do you want to say that sponsors are the real reason why you're going to the rev4? Edited September 18, 2010 by TaPaKaH

[Mr.Scott]

You're not giving me an alternative here: you're simply stating that if I don't say what you insinuate, I'm not clean. And if I am clean, I'd say what you insinuate.

 

The alternative is to simply tell us the truth.

 

I guess it's always easy to see the dark side of things and don't look at the bright side. People will always have something to complain about ... but if you would look closely at the Rev4, you might actually notice that we're doing A LOT to keep the small time overclockers happy. If you don't want to see it, you will not see it, however.

 

I'm sorry, but it's not like the little guys have had a bright spot to look for after the last revision, or what you tell us of this one. And you're right, people will always complain about something, it's human nature, but if you took the time to notice, myself nor my team is on the upper list of chronic complainers. We're actually pretty quiet........unless it's warranted. I'll see how the revision goes, mostly because I like to bench....and you've got the only game in town...........for now.

[Massman]

Hence why not everything is always as you want it to be.

 

You read quiet a bit into one sentence Massman...and you did not address the question directly.

 

Believe me, not all is as I want it to be. As mentioned before, this wasn't written and posted yesterday.

 

As for the second part. I'm anticipating the situation where people would be 'supporting' HWBOT only when decisions are made in their favour. You say you'd support HWBOT if we'd only do what the majority asks, but it's very likely that you might not like what the majority thinks and then just stop supporting the bot.

 

There's no way we can justify working for this site if we have no insurance that we will get the financial support to actually live. In that way, it's easier to work with manufacturers than with individuals ... it gives us the opportunity to not think about the money and focus fully on the development part, whereas unstable income would make it mandatory to focus on income and 'making it through the day' (which, ironically, is the situation we're currently in).

[Mafio]

Voting doesn't always work. Just think about the fact that a lot of our members don't really have a good understanding of english and might not be able to understand the question correctly.

 

FYI, you guys do realize that this team-thing has been discussed within HWBOT as well, right? It's not as if this thing was just written and posted .

 

It's actually the best way to solve hardware sharing, which is one of the biggest sources of discussion in the last couple of months. It's also one of the very few workable solutions that doesn't require pictures, videos and bank receipts as validation. I am open for all suggestions on this topic (apart from the "change back to rev2" ) ... I'd really like to have less cheat accusations.

 

ok, it's the best way to partially avoid hwsharing but at what price?

[ARandomOWL]

For once I agree with you Sam.

 

I think HWbot is going too far to make things fair by ruining many other things. Nothing will ever be perfectly fair. That must be accepted.

 

Edit: Mafio said it better

Edited September 18, 2010 by AJ256

[Massman]

Fair enough, let manufacturers have their UFL corner and leave everyone else alone with all the other "brand new features".

I don't understand your logic - you complain about the complexity and cost of adding features, yet you want to introduce the whole new user/team scoring algorythm when majority is happy with the existing one

 

The majority is? So all the threads about corporate overclockers are like ... 'for real' and 'just to have a bit of fun'?

 

 

 

The alternative is to simply tell us the truth.

 

I did and you replied that I should come clean. You don't accept what I'm saying as the truth and only accept your insinuations as the truth.

 

As long as I'm not repeating what you are saying, I'm not 'coming clean' according to you. Regardless of you being right or wrong.

[K404]

If a user has individual points and a place in the Hardware Masters league, hardware sharing will not be stopped, or even close.

 

I do not think Rev4 in its current form will stamp it out. There is no mechanism that I can think of that will stop hardware sharing. A revision as unpopular as this that aims to only *reduce the temptation* is...well....a waste of time. Make the punishment unbearable and the results will be better. If someone lacks a moral conscience, the only way to get them to stay honest is fear of punishment.

 

 

I do not think wiping out the hard work of so many people in each team is a good move for the future. I really cannot see why you think it is.

 

I fully believe HWB staff did discuss this before you posted.... i'm surprised that some of the plans for Rev4 got as far as this.

 

 

 

How much time, money, LN2, electricity etc will people waste chasing scores that they dont beat? There is, seriously... SERIOUSLY, nothing in this idea to motivate people. 75% will not bother trying. 20% will try and fail, 5% will succeed and make the other guys work, in turn, a waste of time, money, LN2 etc.

 

Please.... drop this part of Rev4 at least. It will NOT help overclocking.

 

Come to think of it.... it wont help component sales in our demographic either. Why bother dropping money on something that wont bring any benefit to the team?

Edited September 18, 2010 by K404

[Massman]

this plus all above - do you want to say that sponsors are the real reason why you're going to the rev4?

 

Corporate overclocking and manufacturers using overclocking as marketing tool is one of the biggest reasons we've split up USER rankings.

 

Other things just come with new revisions. We prefer to make one big change than a million small ones. Eg: the competitions playing a role in the point thing was not for manufacturers but a logical change (why would it not be fair to be rewarded to be in a worldwide final?). The team league is not at all affected by sponsors.

[TaPaKaH]

The majority is? So all the threads about corporate overclockers are like ... 'for real' and 'just to have a bit of fun'?

Again, don't understand your logic.

If you want to solve that issue AND keep the manufacturers happy - create the UFL. Why does it have to come bundled with lots of other features that are not really necessary ?

[MattNo5ss]

... but if you would look closely at the Rev4, you might actually notice that we're doing A LOT to keep the small time overclockers happy. If you don't want to see it, you will not see it, however.

 

There would be a paradox IF we'd start to reward people for not achieving the best result. What this concept is, however, is rewarding people for not choosing an 'easy' way (buy popular hardware) but support the team with different hardware. We reward the best result.

 

This would severely stunt team growth, as stated many times before. Once a guy with sub-zero cooling gets his hands on all the hardware, then his points = the team points. So, anyone else is required to have sub-zero cooling to contribute to the team. This means hardly anyone new will ever join a team, and all the ambient cooling guys might as well just leave the team and start their own since they can't contribute anymore.

 

I understand your quote: "There would be a paradox IF we'd start to reward people for not achieving the best result." For example, it's like every kid in little-league getting a trophy just for playing; it doesn't mean you're the best, but it acknowledges and rewards your effort. Some people work hard for those little "trophies" and it keeps them playing little-league or overclocking for their team. If you have to reward the scores that aren't the best even if it's just to keep teams together, then that's the best course of action, in my opinion.

 

I still don't see how the small time overclockers will be happy. I want to see it, I really do. It must be going over my head or something. Could you explain?

[rickss69]

Believe me, not all is as I want it to be. As mentioned before, this wasn't written and posted yesterday.

 

As for the second part. I'm anticipating the situation where people would be 'supporting' HWBOT only when decisions are made in their favour. You say you'd support HWBOT if we'd only do what the majority asks, but it's very likely that you might not like what the majority thinks and then just stop supporting the bot.

 

There's no way we can justify working for this site if we have no insurance that we will get the financial support to actually live. In that way, it's easier to work with manufacturers than with individuals ... it gives us the opportunity to not think about the money and focus fully on the development part, whereas unstable income would make it mandatory to focus on income and 'making it through the day' (which, ironically, is the situation we're currently in).

 

Finally it comes to the front.

 

I look at it from the perspective here in the United States currently. We made a mistake voting in the current administration which will be corrected in the next voting cycle. We do not withdraw support because we do not favor the current direction we are being herded in...we simply correct the problem as soon as possible. To go against the majority is frought with perils....

[Bobnova]

It will make HW sharing a personal thing and not a team thing, but that change doesn't stop a top tier binned gpu from going through the top guys on a team for their individual benefit.

The team concept goes deeper then just the team's points, as a team the team members help each other out.

I don't see this stopping HW sharing at all. More over, I don't see that the team rankings are even all that important, certainly not nearly as important as the individual rankings are.

 

I can see the general idea, force people to dig out obscure cards/cpus instead of trying to find a golden e6600 and 920 cpus, but IMO all this plan does is force the team members to be much more selfish.