dejo1 Posted February 11, 2011 Share Posted February 11, 2011 No way dude. He's saying he doesn't want to sort though the scores to take out the stuff that uses the same hardware. This is hardware un-sharing. Dejo is talking about Massman's proposed solutions to merge the two accounts. To do this, scores on the same hardware TYPE would have to be removed. So: Dejo would merge the two accounts. But: Would have to sort through and remove the scores with similar hardware. And: Understandably doesn't want to do this by hand. If you guys (hwbot) do an account merge on your end, then only the best scores will be counted anyway right? Dejo: am I missing something? exactly what I am speaking of Jeremy. But apparently we still need some sarcasm from some of the mods here. I think Maxi just misunderstood your post. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Massman Posted February 11, 2011 Share Posted February 11, 2011 If you guys (hwbot) do an account merge on your end, then only the best scores will be counted anyway right? Merging doesn't require that much manual labour. The engine automatically finds the highest scores for each hw/bm category . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Massman Posted February 11, 2011 Share Posted February 11, 2011 Those can remain in the profile, but set to 'no points'? Just throwing ideas here: maybe it's possible to sell/trade the one GTX480 for another card? I suppose it's also a possibility set your scores (with matching hardware) to no points? You'd drop a few boints, but your daughter would still have them all. Tbh, I would prefer this solution over the merger. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Massman Posted February 11, 2011 Share Posted February 11, 2011 Content control for the win, I guess. Cleaned up all the politically insensitive BS as it might divert this topic from it's original goal: finding a solution. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dejo1 Posted February 11, 2011 Share Posted February 11, 2011 once again, why do either of us have to give up points for runs using unique hardware? Why is it alright to use different named hardware and gain points but not with similar hardware that is indeed different pieces of equipment? If I submit 3d runs to futuremark, does it not have any kind of identifier on the gpu's? and if so would that suffice as proof of different hardware? And if so, what about aquamark, where you basically have to take a screenshot of a screenshot. On that we were blatantly accused of just subbing in a different screenshot without moving the apps to verify. Why not just totally drop aquamark, as anyone can cheat it. Take all boints away from the entire category. I truly would like to come to a senile resolution and move on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Massman Posted February 11, 2011 Share Posted February 11, 2011 Because of what we have been saying at the very beginning: The key issue here is contributing positively to the community by understanding that having a separate account for your daughter might make other people suspicious. It might also make other people consider the option of have a virtual aunt/uncle/nephew/son/mother/grand-mother/... to join their team and generate more points. In other words, it's not so much a problem of trust or legitimacy, but rather the hope that someone takes other people's wishes into consideration as well. I actually formulated multiple scenarios which would allow Dejo and his daughter to bond over Overclocking without it having the perception of someone just adding multiple accounts to generate more points. I really hope this is not going to turn out to be a big deal. All we asked for is not to use two separate accounts that both generate points for a single team in order to not cause other people (who might not know the background story) to think something wrong is happening. You've stated that you understand the problem. I assume it still is the case? Originally, the option was to 'allow separate accounts, both with points, not in the same team'. Now, we have two options: - merging both accounts - separate accounts, with points, same team, but different hardware so there is not even the slightest possibility to think hardware sharing is going on For the record, again. This is not about rules or regulation, this is just to make sure you, your daughter and your team will not be accused of hardware sharing in the future by people who do not trust your word. With the years of experience at HWBOT, I can guarantee you that this will be the case. Perhaps not in public, but definitly behind-the-scenes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dejo1 Posted February 11, 2011 Share Posted February 11, 2011 When Bill was going on about cheating, not a thing was done then. To me that is suspicion. Now all of a sudden it is a big deal. I feel that this whole deal stemmed from my original pm to you asking for clarification on the rules. to which it took 3 weeks for a reply (I do understand that every person helping here is busy), in that time I got October here very own 920. Did a cold session on dice with her, yes I did help quite a bit. But they are her runs. We submit one day after you sent your reply, but thought we had already conformed to the rules. Whats funny to me is that within 1-2 hours of her submission, I have a PM stating "So you did it anyway". I feel that over that you have a beef with me personally. As from that time forward there have been 2 more accusations of cheating, without once bringing up "there could be a morality issue here". I do understand that and fully. But just because a few may feel that it is a cheat, does not make it a cheat. That is the reason that I have stood my ground. I asked several times that if there was suspicion to give me a pm, so that I had a chance to defend my name and my teams name. But the accusation kept coming. what I fail to see, is why does it matter if it is October that has a second 920 for our team or if its Joe Six Pack? If it is indeed unique hardware and a different user, it is unique hardware. Once her points are gone, we lose a future bencher. I am sure that even now she is dissapointed enough to not want to waste her time with it anymore. So after all that has transpired. I have a 920 that is quite a bit less capable than what I origianlly had. I have pairs of 4870's, 5770's and 480's that are basically useless to me, as I am not a gamer. and are also not worth what points the could be. So basically I have spent money that basically does no good. Many will say "you are ignorant for spending money of hardware for points anyway", but that is what we do as benchers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Massman Posted February 11, 2011 Share Posted February 11, 2011 I completely understand your situation and the logic behind it. The reasoning is correct and, if it would be possible to prove with 100% certainty that hardware is unique I'm sure this issue would not even exist. But this is HWBOT reality. And I've been dealing with this reality for quite some time now. Reality has learned me that, in general, people are not very trusting. The trust-issues have various causes, one being the anonymity of the internet, another one being unable to be 100% about what hardware has been used. Also, we have to take into account the current method of calculating the team points, which is running at the tip of its toes currently. This situation, along with others, is fully streching the system almost to the point where it could break. In this reality, defined by above parameters, I (as well as the staff) have learned what sets people off thinking another person has cheated. We have also learned that these cheating accusations are not always aired publically, but are often discussed behind the scenes. More than once I had the pleasure of talking with another overclocker in real-life about how this or that person cheated. In fact, even if you provide proof or evidence ... people will still think you're suspicious. I know, it's not much fun, but it's reality. Since you are in the situation where you have the opportunity to bond over this hobby with your daughter, me (as well as the other staff) were concerned that these accusations would draw her away from this. To prevent that from happening, we want to give you a number of possibilities to avoid this mess completely. It takes a little bit from your points or effort, but in return you'd not have to face any accusations (in public or behind your back). In addition, by giving a little you'd also save all those people who might get suspicious the time to complain and be mad about this. Last (and definitly least), the staff would not have to deal with incoming accusations of being 'naive', 'biased' or 'stupid' for not seeing the 'obvious sharing'. Win-win-win for all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Massman Posted February 11, 2011 Share Posted February 11, 2011 For the record, I (and I only) sincerely apologise and take blame for all the misunderstandings that lead to this massive thread. I should have been much clearer on this topic from the absolute beginning. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dejo1 Posted February 11, 2011 Share Posted February 11, 2011 I am sure that "justice" (for lack of a better word) has to start somewhere. I am willing to accept a combining of our accounts. And hope that she can still find a reason to want to bench with me. But what will happen when someone else submits scores that are suspicious? Will they be terminated? Or will it fall on deaf ears once again, as Bill found out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Massman Posted February 11, 2011 Share Posted February 11, 2011 They will be dealt with with the best intentions. Please note that no one is accusing you from anything. All I want is not having to see you or your daughter getting accused of anything in the future. Even the thought of people contemplating you'd use your daughter to cheat in the rankings makes me sick. As for Bill's (I presume Benchzowner?) findings I can be rather short: his article was nothing more than a plausible-sounding theory based on semi-linked stories. We actually did check up on, for instance, that W3540 chip and no one but BZ found there was something illegal going on. As with any of the score/result sharing, it's not exact science and we often have to run with the things we have. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dejo1 Posted February 11, 2011 Share Posted February 11, 2011 is there any kind of unique gpu identifier within a futuremark submission? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Massman Posted February 11, 2011 Share Posted February 11, 2011 As far as I know, it's not possible to identify a unique hardware sample. You can detect the core id, which is the same for all cores, and bios id to the level of bios version, IIRC, but not bios chip #. A while ago, Jarnis_FM posted on the forums that they can detect unique hardware (for instance for the LOC incident), but that was not based on a unique VGA card but based on other similarities. In short: as far as I know, there is no method to differentiate cards on a sample level. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dejo1 Posted February 11, 2011 Share Posted February 11, 2011 I was thinking that I could prove her hardware as well as my own that way. but so be it. can the staff there do a combining of our accounts? if so, please go ahead and make the change. I will be somewhat content with that as a resolution, as it seems the best for the team and is the lesser of evils at this point. I will once again apologize for my teams willingness to stand behind us in this whole ordeal. We are a tight group for the most part. Surely wish it didnt come to this, as it made all parties look like jackholes. One parting piece of advice. I hope that future suspicions be dealt with via pm in more civil tones than of accusations, I think that is what first got my blood going. I think my blood pressure is once again, at least lower than my weight. hehe Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kow_ciller Posted February 11, 2011 Share Posted February 11, 2011 (edited) Actually, there is a way to prove that hardware is separate. According to the hwbot rules, if pictures including the serial numbers are included in the submissions they're supposed to be legal. If you could take pictures of the serial number on the card while benching that MIGHT work. But im not sure if that is sufficient for Massman (even though its in the rules...) For future reference massman, you might want to add something in the rules that makes multiple accounts using the same hardware (while in the same household,etc.) illegal. Otherwise they didn't break any rule in place and its just the bot making up rulings for rules whenever it feels like it and theres nothing set in place. Edited February 11, 2011 by kow_ciller Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sno Posted February 11, 2011 Share Posted February 11, 2011 Actually, there is a way to prove that hardware is separate. According to the hwbot rules, if pictures including the serial numbers are included in the submissions they're supposed to be legal. If you could take pictures of the serial number on the card while benching that MIGHT work. But im not sure if that is sufficient for Massman (even though its in the rules...) For future reference massman, you might want to add something in the rules that makes multiple accounts using the same hardware (while in the same household,etc.) illegal. Otherwise they didn't break any rule in place and its just the bot making up rulings for rules whenever it feels like it and theres nothing set in place. Dude get the fuuuu of this thread with posts like that, this is the same shit that started so much drama in the first place. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bobnova Posted February 11, 2011 Share Posted February 11, 2011 Kow's right though, there are rules that were aimed at this sort of question of hardware sharing. In this specific case they're being skipped over and new rules are being implimented, namely that if your results might arouse suspicions later, they will be removed. Not because they're invalid or illegal, just because they look suspicious. If this is the way it is going to be, that is fine, but please do put it into the rulebook for reference. In the mean time, I dearly hope that this new "might cause suspicions" rule is applied to everybody, and not just dejo/daughter. There are a lot of suspicious results in the database, and this is a great way to get rid of them. To that end, I have started a new thread that has nothing to do with this one, about some extremely suspicious results (moreso IMO then dejo/daughter, but that's just me). I hope that this new ruling made in this thread will be applied to more then just OCF. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maxi Posted February 11, 2011 Share Posted February 11, 2011 Otherwise they didn't break any rule in place and its just the bot making up rulings for rules whenever it feels like it and theres nothing set in place. No rules were made up. Existing rules require submissions are done by the person owning the hardware, duh. That doesn't mean two accounts either. If dejo gave october hardware she can submit with it. The problem was submissions that appear to be done by the same person. C'mon guys, we've seen this over the years countless times. hwbot has always moderated these. There have been threads in the lounge with people complaining about exactly the same problem (go look them up) and now when it's OCF it's supposed to be OK. But enough of that, Massman is close to a solution here, let's not loose sight of that. Enough damage has ben done as it is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kow_ciller Posted February 11, 2011 Share Posted February 11, 2011 No rules were made up. Existing rules require submissions are done by the person owning the hardware, duh. That doesn't mean two accounts either. If dejo gave october hardware she can submit with it. The problem was submissions that appear to be done by the same person. C'mon guys, we've seen this over the years countless times. hwbot has always moderated these. There have been threads in the lounge with people complaining about exactly the same problem (go look them up) and now when it's OCF it's supposed to be OK. So with that, would something like a livestream showing his daughter benching be sufficient proof? (just for future reference if someone has a friend or relative start benching) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dejo1 Posted February 11, 2011 Share Posted February 11, 2011 No rules were made up. Existing rules require submissions are done by the person owning the hardware, duh. That doesn't mean two accounts either. If dejo gave october hardware she can submit with it. The problem was submissions that appear to be done by the same person. C'mon guys, we've seen this over the years countless times. hwbot has always moderated these. There have been threads in the lounge with people complaining about exactly the same problem (go look them up) and now when it's OCF it's supposed to be OK. But enough of that, Massman is close to a solution here, let's not loose sight of that. Enough damage has ben done as it is. submissions appear to be done by the same person. "so we are obviously cheating" once again. Wow. I give in and am now cheating once again Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Massman Posted February 12, 2011 Share Posted February 12, 2011 The merge has taken place. I'll close this thread. If anything comes up in the future, Dejo or the OCForums team captain are welcome to post here. Reference - thread over at overclockers.com: http://www.overclockers.com/forums/showthread.php?t=668746 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts