User liqmet

[TASOS]

@liqmet

 

PLEASE

 

Stop reporting results with no obvious reason

Especially the old and very old results.

 

The majority of old results from 2006,2007,2008,2009 ... have been checked by moderators.

 

Just an example.

You cant report such a result for missing photo or non-working links.

 

Read the rules and use common sense.

 

Use the report button wisely

 

Thank you

[TASOS]

And when I threw you messages?

 

It's not about me personally.

It's about my fellow team members.

 

 

 

Example of one , of your reported results (and it's not the only one)

 

http://hwbot.org/submission/725814_hipro5_cpu_frequency_pentium_4_2.66_ghz_3560_mhz

 

 

7 year and 10 months ago hipro5: manual online submission

14 hours ago liqmet: reported by user (proof,delete it)

 

 

 

//

 

P.S.

Dont report jmke's results ... also

He was the man , that was verifing the results back then

Edited February 5, 2016 by TASOS

[TASOS]

He is 32nd(not 20) and he used wcpuid

 

You really dont understand ...

Please someone in his native language explain him ....

 

[Ananerbe]

@TASOS

My team has the same problem, with many reports from this user. I tried to convey to him that the rules should be read. But he never took up the matter.

Edited February 5, 2016 by Ananerbe

[TASOS]

@TASOS

My team has the same problem, with many of the report of the user. I tried to convey to him that the rules should be read. But he never took up the matter.

 

I suspect , that he is reporting results in general , not showing any kind of favoring ?

 

I will be patient , then.

[TerraRaptor]

And when I threw you messages?

По руÑÑки - к Ñтарым результатам неприменимы Ñовременные правила (вплоть до 2009 Ð´Ð»Ñ Ð²Ñех теÑтов, Ð´Ð»Ñ Ð°ÐºÐ²Ð°Ð¼Ð°Ñ€ÐºÐ° до 2012). Правила менÑлиÑÑŒ, Ð´Ð»Ñ Ñ‚ÐµÑ… времен результаты были оформлены доÑтаточно правильно, чтобы получать меÑто и очки. Ðовые правила не имеют обратной Ñилы, поÑтому нефиг жаловатьÑÑ Ð½Ð° результаты, датированные более ранним временем, чем Ñ‚Ð²Ð¾Ñ Ñ€ÐµÐ³Ð¸ÑÑ‚Ñ€Ð°Ñ†Ð¸Ñ Ð½Ð° боте. Ферштейн?

[phobosq]

I like the "verstehen?" part

[xxbassplayerxx]

Lots of reports on OCN subs too, while we're joining the party :celebration:

[Mr.Scott]

We get 'em too. He shows no favoritism.

[Schmuckley]

Is he reporting Turrican man? cuz that would..not be cool.

[Gunslinger]

Need an "enable/disable reporting capabilities" in the Admin control panel for people like this.

[websmile]

Tons of the reports are wrong, 3d06 reported for lack of mainboard info at template (not mandatory), cpu validations as well (not mandatory), and so on and on. It is also not helpful to report 8 year old checked results, screens were lost or miss mem tab which was not mandatory at time of submission, wprime net is messed, so links are wrong (not user or hwbots fault), he reports checked results anyway. Tons of workload for mods, annoyance for users, I guess we need to talk about this at staff again and find a solution, this is not helpful but often trolling and should have an end

Edited February 6, 2016 by websmile

[Gunslinger]

Tons of the reports are wrong, 3d06 reported for lack of mainboard info at template (not mandatory), cpu validations as well (not mandatory), and so on and on. It is also not helpful to report 8 year old checked results, screens were lost or miss mem tab which was not mandatory at time of submission, wprime net is messed, so links are wrong (not user or hwbots fault), he reports checked results anyway. Tons of workload for mods, annoyance for users, I guess we need to talk about this at staff again and find a solution, this is not helpful but often trolling and should have an end

 

see my comment above simply turn it off for guys like this :celebration:

[K404]

Is there a way to make results submitted before date X unreportable as standard?

 

ie... when a "big" change is made to the rules, everything already submitted cannot be reported so easily? I know that with a suggestion so simple, there are a lot of holes, but something along these lines could be really useful.

 

I don't know when the GPU-Z rule was first enforced, so I don't know what is and isn't on the wrong side of being reported etc.

[websmile]

As soon as we find time we will try to find a solution for this, Kenny, one way or the other.

 

On topic, if this doesn´t stop I will propose to ban the user from reporting like Mike proposed or from hwbot completely, he obviously does not know the rules and on top causes unnecessary workload. Mods are not here to add information like mainboards at cpu validations, these are neither needed nor mandatory, he annoys lots of users on top and this is something we can not tolerate any longer imho

Edited February 6, 2016 by websmile

[Strunkenbold]

My opinion is, it is annoying and some of his reported subs are actually correct but there where hundreds of results which where not.

It is not only him who reports old scores.

 

It is a problem because we finally have to state in the rules that we make exceptions for old results. We have to add a deadline or it will be blurry for ever and we face those problems again when liqmet2 appears.

 

New users also dont know about the server crash hwbot had and lost many screenshots because of that.

Users in general also dont know about results which were already reported or not. They simply dont see subs history, why not making it appear for them?

 

Finally while I thinks it not okay to report scores because of missing, not mandatory information, it is when wrong information is provided.

[I.nfraR.ed]

I agree with Strunkenbold.

 

Maybe it will be good to add:

- Statement in rules regarding old results and results with lost screenshots.

- A link to that statement at every submission's sidebar

- Perhaps a marker that a submission was checked by a moderator previously or better the moderation history

- A warning/info box that a certain submission is older than <insert date here> and some of the rules can't be enforced for it

- Maybe even remove report functionality for old submissions, but sometimes you would need to report some of them, when for example score entered does not match the one on the screenshot - typos happen and need to be corrected by a moderator.

On many of the old scores the info about cooling and components used are in the description. There should be a way to report them, so this info can be entered by a moderator.

 

I also remember a period when all validations for socket A were flagged as invalid, because cpuz read double the FSB. New users might not know this. And many more things like this.

[websmile]

There has to be found a solution for the old subs, I did requests on this already several times but we still have status quo, doesn´t seem to be this easy. The problems of lost screenshots, lost info at old forum scans and the messed up validations at wprime net are not new, and we need a solution and decision

On the general issue, we have rules, these say what is mandatory for validation and what not. I see no way why staff should do bencher`s work when they don´t bother to enter non mandatory information like mainboard used at cpuz cpu frequency validation or spd tab/mainboard tab at 3d benches, and why should we correct wrong information on this when people use pre-occupy button and don´t bother to edit mainboard for example? We are here to enforce rules and not to pamper people who don´t bother to make complete form submission but only put in what is used for validating score. I also see no reason to report results because non mandatory information is wrong or missing, and this is a major problem when people do this, because it is nonsense, and this is what I criticzed here before. Where do we set the line, psu model missing, report because you see it at picture? We are a community build on people being responsible for their actions, submissions and information that is given, and moderators task is to make sure results are valid with the rules, we are not the nsa.

And again on topic, when I have lots of correct results reported by a few users because the guys don´t read the rules or google what they report (MSI model at validation for example, is often shown which internal msi mainboard number, you can easily check this instead of reporting correctly listed submission, on 3ds validation links are often not mandatory or even possible on old 3dmarks) we have to find a solution. This is trolling and not acceptable if it happens all the time, and this annoys benchers massively, and staff on top.

Everyone shoudlld really check the rules again if he is unsure if a score is valid or not, before!! he reports, this is a fair deal

 

P.S. To make this clear, it is OK when you report a submission that is not compliant with the rules - on the old stuff, it is mainly our own fault that we have no solution so far. But reporting valid subs because of being bored and being too lazy to read the rules is not OK, and this is what I call trolling if it happens all the time by same persons

Edited February 9, 2016 by websmile

[TerraRaptor]

I would create a reputation system for reporting. User with good repatation may report, user with bad rep may not. Reputation votes for user are available to mods only. So after reporting 10 good subs user is banned from report functionality.

[I.nfraR.ed]

This is a nice idea, indeed.

 

Michael,

 

by this

1) Maybe even remove report functionality for old submissions, but sometimes you would need to report some of them, when for example score entered does not match the one on the screenshot - typos happen and need to be corrected by a moderator.

2) On many of the old scores the info about cooling and components used are in the description. There should be a way to report them, so this info can be entered by a moderator.

 

I meant:

1) An example: I had personally reported some older socket A score with typo in let's say pifast time which was ranked 1st, while I had a better score. The typo was that the user entered 12, instead of 21...something like that. There should be a way to correct this.

A moderator can't go through all submissions, but when another user is benching some specific hardware and browsing through scores, he might notice such things.

 

2) Yes, this is not a real problem. So you're right about it. It would be nice for example to add the cooling method if it is written in description of really old subs, but that does not mean the submission is incorrect. Just nice to have

[lanbonden]

This is a nice idea, indeed.

 

Michael,

 

by this

 

 

I meant:

1) An example: I had personally reported some older socket A score with typo in let's say pifast time which was ranked 1st, while I had a better score. The typo was that the user entered 12, instead of 21...something like that. There should be a way to correct this.

A moderator can't go through all submissions, but when another user is benching some specific hardware and browsing through scores, he might notice such things.

 

2) Yes, this is not a real problem. So you're right about it. It would be nice for example to add the cooling method if it is written in description of really old subs, but that does not mean the submission is incorrect. Just nice to have

 

Yea Ive noticed more then a few of this wrong hardware scores when benching old hardware, mostly when it comes to placing the GPU in the wrong categori so there is indeed a reason to let the old scores still be open for reporting. This part also troubles me when it comes to old scores that lost screenshoots if they are really good, as I know Ive got other good old scores moved couse they where with the wrong hardware.

 

For solutions, I can see two alternatives.

 

1) Remove the option to report a score that have already been reported and cleared by a moderator, if someone still finds something wrong let there be some forum thread for rereporting this as its a beter place to write a good post describing whats wrong with the score.

 

2) Make a way to remove the option to report scores for people that abuse it, not sure how to make it tho but maybe when your at below a certain % of good reports after X reports or just let the mods decide when to do it?

[Leeghoofd]

let us sum it up that Liqmet is a busy bee... a full time programmer is needed to add the gazillion of different motherboard types to the database...

 

To be honest I'm in with Lanbonden, there should be an option that when a score has been checked several times by a moderator that it is and remains approved. Thus becomes sort of unreportable aka untouchable...

 

Nevertheless with the current system some keep on reporting the same score over and over again... which is very time consuming for the moderation team.

[Antinomy]

There is a possibility that a score has been put in the wrong category which happens in old categories that were not perfect back then. Although, such rare cases could be reported via forum thread. And for screenshots and other the submissions could be made solid/unreportable.

[TASOS]

I have to bring this issue up.

 

User liqmet continuously reports old submission , without using at least common sense.

 

There where many other reported subs in the time between ...

 

But

This time he reported two 9+ years old submissions , from the bot tag era (the very 1st bot system in forums , if someone remembers ... )

 

9 year and 5 months ago botservice: scanned by bot on forum

 

These are 0 points submissions , with dead imageshack links.

 

What can i say ?

More work for the mods.

 

Should hwbot staff , perhaps consider disabling the report button of this user ???

[Oj0]

The forum bot was pretty damn neat, although with the vast amount of info required for new subs I can fully understand why it had to go.