Massman Posted March 1, 2009 Share Posted March 1, 2009 Manufacturers don't start giving hardware JUST because people have a high individual hwbot ranking . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jokester Posted March 1, 2009 Share Posted March 1, 2009 Manufacturers don't start giving hardware JUST because people have a high individual hwbot ranking . But it certainly isn't a hinderance. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Massman Posted March 1, 2009 Share Posted March 1, 2009 It shouldn't be Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
K404 Posted March 1, 2009 Share Posted March 1, 2009 (edited) !! Before I explicitly say YES or NO, I'd like to have a look at the implications of the concept points-wise. !! Thanks Thats really all that we ask so things are worked out to be as fair as possible to everyone involved. possibly off-topic... I believe a lot of this WILL come down to money. Using an example of 3 people benching together under one name- If hardware was cheap, each of them could afford to buy it themselves and bench it. That would bring more points to their actual team and they would still have good personal rankings..which really would be personal because it was them on their own. People benching (or at least...submitting) alone would be better for their actual team because of the hardware category allocation as well but thats not to say that people joining forces in this way can only be bad for teams- GLOBALLY, they will be noticed more and we all know that all-out world records get more attention than the No.1 spots for...a 7800GT or whatever. Edited March 1, 2009 by K404 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
r1ch Posted March 1, 2009 Share Posted March 1, 2009 To really break things down so it's hopefully simpler to understand, i'll try and explain what I think the main issues are. Single Person example: £500 for hardware 10 hours per week for benching = No chance of global points = Same limitations for 2 other members. Group of 3 people: £1500 for hardware (Hardware points without trying) 30 hours per week for benching (Lots of time to share overclock settings) = Global points galore. The problem is that we are all competing in a "member" ranking. How is 1 person vs 3 people a fair contest? The hwbot team are right to say that if you combined peoples current point scores, you wouldn't get more points so that argument is wrong. But the main point is that looking forward, if 3 team members teamed up it would open doors and points not available to a single person. Think about this in the worst scenario and you could have the top 10 "members" on hwbot being groups of people - is that right? No. I'll admit I don't know what the solution is. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
knopflerbruce Posted March 1, 2009 Share Posted March 1, 2009 As long as the rules are the same for every team (that you can create subteams like this), it's not a HUGE problem. It looks weird, but massman ahs said numrous times that this is indeed allowed, so all of you who wish to create a shared account, go ahead and do it instead of asking the same questions over and over again:p ...but I must say this is not a good solution, if too many do this it'll be a LOT harder for individuals with limited resources. Then we need a league for single users ONLY:p The best solution would be to ask BenchBros (and maybe leghorn-giorgioprimo, if that is a subteam of 2 people) to split their accounts within some time frame, say 6 months or so. That'll give them plenty of time to get good scores with their own gear. Just make sure you point out that they can still bench together, just not upload scores to the same account, if that's the way this is solved. PS: there was a question about session scores, perhaps that one is relevant to this discussion as well? Don't remember what was the conclusion of that debate. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Massman Posted March 2, 2009 Share Posted March 2, 2009 To really break things down so it's hopefully simpler to understand, i'll try and explain what I think the main issues are. Single Person example: £500 for hardware 10 hours per week for benching = No chance of global points = Same limitations for 2 other members. Group of 3 people: £1500 for hardware (Hardware points without trying) 30 hours per week for benching (Lots of time to share overclock settings) = Global points galore. More globals for one account, but losing the globals for the two other accounts. This method seems only interesting when you form a team with one good bencher (not having lots of cash) and one less good bencher (with a lot of cash). If you form groups of multiple good benchers who can only get up to 15-20 points (top100) due to time/fund restrictions, you will be losing a lot of global points because you lose two teams. Group: 1 x 50 points Individual: 3 x 20 points I have very little time these next few days due to CeBit, so please have a little patience for the final verdict. The problem is that we are all competing in a "member" ranking. How is 1 person vs 3 people a fair contest? That's indeed an issue that has to be addressed; up untill this discussions, I had no issues with people who share one account because they only bench together. I know that Giorgio and Leghorn are only benching on saturdays (or free days), so them having a single account is no issue. After all, it's not because of the points, it's because the just always bench together. Same goes for the Benchbros, btw. However, since this has become an issue and people are explicitly talking about merging accounts in the hope for higher points, it's become a more delicate issue. Whereas I don't have problems with shared accounts because of personal reasons, I actually DO have a problem with sharing accounts in an attempt to increase points. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bazx Posted March 2, 2009 Share Posted March 2, 2009 (edited) as i get quite a bit of hardware sent to me from manufactures and don't have time to bench it it makes sence for me to to merge with others with very few points that have the time to work on the hardware and get points that i don't have time to go get also it will give more coverage to the sponsor Edited March 2, 2009 by bazx Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
K404 Posted March 2, 2009 Share Posted March 2, 2009 That's indeed an issue that has to be addressed; up untill this discussions, I had no issues with people who share one account because they only bench together. I know that Giorgio and Leghorn are only benching on saturdays (or free days), so them having a single account is no issue. After all, it's not because of the points, it's because the just always bench together. Same goes for the Benchbros, btw. However, since this has become an issue and people are explicitly talking about merging accounts in the hope for higher points, it's become a more delicate issue. Whereas I don't have problems with shared accounts because of personal reasons, I actually DO have a problem with sharing accounts in an attempt to increase points. Realistically, its an approach Benchtec dont want to take UNLESS it becomes the status quo and it becomes the only way to maintain our position and impact globally. Its an approach thats open to abuse, hence the explicit methods discussed of abusing it- so we can show it needs regulation. Enjoy CeBit! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Massman Posted March 2, 2009 Share Posted March 2, 2009 It's open for abuse, but this hasn't been the case before benchtec openly announced they would do anything to benefit. To be precise: the people of benchbros have contacted me in the past to inform us that they have NO interest in finding a backdoor to more points. In fact, when I explained what the issues where with a joined account, they agreed instantly on having all scores merged to the single account and have their own deleted. The accounts were deleted after they explicitly asked us to do so because there where complaints from people accusing them from cheating with global points (multiple accounts - multiple globals). Same goes for Giorgio and Leghorn, by the way . That's why it comes as such surprise that there are suddenly that many people so 'furious' about this. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bazx Posted March 2, 2009 Share Posted March 2, 2009 (edited) if you are unable to make rules that make sense that is your problem massman if you allow the creation of sub teams then it is for every team to make there mind up whether or not to do so you have already allowed the creation of two sub teams now you must make up your mind if this was the right decision and either continue with sub teams or with draw them it is as simple as that dissolve the two or stand by and see the creation of many new ones as i get quite a bit of hardware sent to me from manufactures and don't have time to bench it it makes sence for me to to merge with others with very few points that have the time to work on the hardware and get points that i don't have time to go get also it will give more coverage to the sponsor Edited March 2, 2009 by bazx Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
r1ch Posted March 3, 2009 Share Posted March 3, 2009 (edited) It's open for abuse, but this hasn't been the case before benchtec openly announced they would do anything to benefit. I think that statement is very unfair. As a team participating in a competition, we will do what we can to compete with the other teams on a level playing field, within the rules. At the moment, we are at a disadvantage as we could gain more points from taking the approach of having multiple people in a single account but are not. Using your own words, we are not yet "abusing" the system, whereas you seem to imply that these other multiple person teams are? I don't think that's what you meant to say, but that's how you have said it. All that I, and other members from benchtec, are calling for, is a clarficiation of what's allowed and what's not. If multiple person teams are allowed, some of us will not agree with the decision, but we will accept it. We will look into this and organise it so we can gain more points. If they're not allowed, then those teams will need to be seperated, and I'm fine with knopflerbruce's suggestion that this is done over a period of time. Until that decision is taken by hwbot, I think this thread has come to an end. Edited March 3, 2009 by r1ch Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
knopflerbruce Posted March 3, 2009 Share Posted March 3, 2009 if you are unable to make rules that make sense that is your problem massman if you allow the creation of sub teams then it is for every team to make there mind up whether or not to do so you have already allowed the creation of two sub teams now you must make up your mind if this was the right decision and either continue with sub teams or with draw them it is as simple as that dissolve the two or stand by and see the creation of many new ones Then create new subteams;) No-one will stop you as long as the other accounts will be deleted. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bazx Posted March 3, 2009 Share Posted March 3, 2009 knopflerbruce you are a funny man you remind me of a drunk at a party that wonders from room to room talking sh*t lol if you read some of whats been said you will discover that we are waiting for massman to approve the creations of sub teams he has said we need to wait not me by massman !! Before I explicitly say YES or NO, I'd like to have a look at the implications of the concept points-wise. !! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
knopflerbruce Posted March 4, 2009 Share Posted March 4, 2009 knopflerbruce you are a funny man you remind me of a drunk at a party that wonders from room to room talking sh*t lol if you read some of whats been said you will discover that we are waiting for massman to approve the creations of sub teams he has said we need to wait not me Yes, but he also said to BenchBros and leghorn-giorgioprimo that they were allowed to do this a long time ago;) I've also read things that sound like this: "sure, you can do this, but then your old accounts must be deleted, and it's bad for your team as they will lose points". Sure, I'm funny:p I try to keep the sh*t-talking to a minimum, but anyone can make mistakes. However, I'm sure you'll find posts where someone said it was allowed, too. Even if there are others where it says you have to wait for a final decision:p Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Massman Posted March 5, 2009 Share Posted March 5, 2009 if you are unable to make rules that make sense that is your problem massman I'm sorry that I don't invest time in figuring out specific regulations for non-existing issues. Up untill this thread, there were absolutely no problems: no one complained about Benchbros or L-G other than the 'they have two accounts' issue, which was resolved almost instantly. We are not talking about non-sense rules, we are just talking about no rules. You know what the problem is? Both L-G and Benchbros were completely honest with us. They could've just created an account with one of the names and always just bench together ... same points, same ranks, only the name differs. No one would've noticed that and we wouldn't have any issues. If you create subteams, will the people who are in one team always bench together? Or is it only about sharing the hardware. I think that statement is very unfair. As a team participating in a competition, we will do what we can to compete with the other teams on a level playing field, within the rules. At the moment, we are at a disadvantage as we could gain more points from taking the approach of having multiple people in a single account but are not. Using your own words, we are not yet "abusing" the system, whereas you seem to imply that these other multiple person teams are? I don't think that's what you meant to say, but that's how you have said it. All that I, and other members from benchtec, are calling for, is a clarficiation of what's allowed and what's not. If multiple person teams are allowed, some of us will not agree with the decision, but we will accept it. We will look into this and organise it so we can gain more points. If they're not allowed, then those teams will need to be seperated, and I'm fine with knopflerbruce's suggestion that this is done over a period of time. Until that decision is taken by hwbot, I think this thread has come to an end. It's unfair because I don't like the fact that you want to find a loophole just to gain more points? You're not yet abusing the system ... yet. From what I'm hearing here it's not about the clarification or just to have regulations, it's about actually abandoning personal accounts and forming subteams to gain just a few extra points. Maybe I should add a little line in the ethics section of the rules that says: "Hwbot holds every right to prevent people taking advantage of loopholes only to get more points"? Would that make more sense? Anyway, I'm back from CeBit, so I'll have some time figuring out the benefits of joined accounts. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
knopflerbruce Posted March 5, 2009 Share Posted March 5, 2009 I'm sorry that I don't invest time in figuring out specific regulations for non-existing issues. Up untill this thread, there were absolutely no problems: no one complained about Benchbros or L-G other than the 'they have two accounts' issue, which was resolved almost instantly. We are not talking about non-sense rules, we are just talking about no rules. You know what the problem is? Both L-G and Benchbros were completely honest with us. They could've just created an account with one of the names and always just bench together ... same points, same ranks, only the name differs. No one would've noticed that and we wouldn't have any issues. If you create subteams, will the people who are in one team always bench together? Or is it only about sharing the hardware. It's unfair because I don't like the fact that you want to find a loophole just to gain more points? You're not yet abusing the system ... yet. From what I'm hearing here it's not about the clarification or just to have regulations, it's about actually abandoning personal accounts and forming subteams to gain just a few extra points. Maybe I should add a little line in the ethics section of the rules that says: "Hwbot holds every right to prevent people taking advantage of loopholes only to get more points"? Would that make more sense? Anyway, I'm back from CeBit, so I'll have some time figuring out the benefits of joined accounts. Well, how can you determine who are abusing the loophole and who are not? But yeah, it's not a problem until people start flooding the bot with these accounts. IF that happens, make some new rules. For the time being, let's keep them as they are. I bet alot of the talking in here is about principles, and not serious "threats" about creating subteams just for points. Besides, as you say, there is not really much to gain anyway - except in certain special situations where one dude has the money and the other has the skill or something:p Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bustah Posted March 6, 2009 Share Posted March 6, 2009 It's unfair because I don't like the fact that you want to find a loophole just to gain more points? . I dont think thats right at all Massman, that kind of implies that you think we are a little bit left of being honest. No one from Benchtec as far as I know is looking for loopholes, just clarification on what the rules are? if there is a loophole as you say then we have identified it and informed you of it. if we wanted to exploit a loophole the issue would not have been raised in the first place we would have just created sub teams and said nothing no? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Massman Posted March 6, 2009 Share Posted March 6, 2009 I dont think thats right at all Massman, that kind of implies that you think we are a little bit left of being honest. No one from Benchtec as far as I know is looking for loopholes, just clarification on what the rules are? if there is a loophole as you say then we have identified it and informed you of it. Time to bring out the quotes: if the creation of sub teams is allowed and we can get more points and cheaper hardware we will do it This comment obliges us to design regulations for something that wasn't a problem to begin with . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
K404 Posted March 6, 2009 Share Posted March 6, 2009 (edited) Hey... thats unfair. To be bluntly honest....guys pooling resources against people benching by themselves ISN'T fair....and (IMHO) HWB should do something about it. Which is our point. Benchtec (AFAIK) have never looked for ways to bend the rules in our favour. We bench. Thats what we do. The politics side doesnt interest me but in an INDIVIDUAL ranking how can you possibly defend people benching together under one name. You asked us to dissolve the Benchtec Group login basically because other teams couldnt be trusted to have one, then you do this? Come on.... head out the sand please. We're discussing this because it could easily BECOME a problem. Do you not want us to bring to attention the flaws in HWB and just hope no-one less honest catches on? If the current situation isnt a problem, then we arent exploiting a loophole. If it is...you just identified the situation as a loophole...of your own making. edited... I was a bit tactless to start. Sorry. Edited March 6, 2009 by K404 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Massman Posted March 6, 2009 Share Posted March 6, 2009 You asked us to dissolve the Benchtec Group login basically because other teams couldnt be trusted to have one, then you do this? The BenchTec Group login was an extra account. The people who submitted to that account also had their own, individual account, which is a critical point in this discussion. Like I said, there's no point in not accepting benchbros or Leghorn/giorgio. First of all, the impact on the members and teams ranking is close to nothing and second, they'd just rename the account. Would you like it if Benchbros was renamed to Benchbro? Then it's just one person who benches along with his two friends who have no account on hwbot. I'd be an individual who only has joined bench sessions. Same goes for Leghorn/giorgio: would it make you feel better if they changed the name to 'Leghorn'? The end result will still be the same: they bench together. We can make a bunch of new rules, but the effect will be non-existing. If you only want better regulations, the easiest solution for us is to see these accounts as special accounts. We wouldn't allow people to just form subteams, but it can be allowed in special circumstances (we'd ask for a reason). I know the reasons for the few team accounts and they are all completely valid. 'To get more points' would not be a valid reason ;-). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
K404 Posted March 6, 2009 Share Posted March 6, 2009 If it could be highlighted in some way, that would help yea Im sure that if the accounts were separate, the teams they belong to would benefit. Separating them would *probably* only help them (and indirectly hinder us) I dont think theres any benefit in this for Benchtec. I want HWB to be perfect. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
r1ch Posted March 6, 2009 Share Posted March 6, 2009 It's unfair because I don't like the fact that you want to find a loophole just to gain more points? We're discussing this because it could easily BECOME a problem. Do you not want us to bring to attention the flaws in HWB and just hope no-one less honest catches on? If the current situation isnt a problem, then we arent exploiting a loophole. If it is...you just identified the situation as a loophole...of your own making. It's not US that have "found a loophole", it's the multiple person teams that YOU allowed. We would only be following what other people are doing to make it FAIR. I'll say again, we can talk and talk about this but I think the topic needs to be closed until hwbot make a decision. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.