Thor941 Posted April 10, 2009 Posted April 10, 2009 be serious? yup, it's time teams "be serious" when they post a massive load of news scores with similar hardware done on a LANparty. without info mods will guess, since they have no extra info to go on. in this case they decided to look at the scores in detail; if you guys had post up the lan in advance, you can get a nice newspost at the front of HWBot with pics of the lan, with some nice scores a report etc etc and no issues would have been had; instead, without the info up front moderators tried their best to make sense of the similar scores done with similar hardware by same team members posted on the same day. be serious. HWBot moderation, serious business ! fair moderation comes from proper information posted up front from all parties involved. any reason for a score to be suspicious will cause more scrutiny on any and all details included of the scores. --------- see this is an experience to build on; post higher ranked scores; keep HWbot in the loop; make the best of this. ------ report all you want; doesn't mean we'll block them; this is not HWblock.org, as mentioned MILLIONS of times now in this thread by SEVERAL mods 1. if we have to inform the bot when massive scores will be posted, put it in the rules, at the moment it is not 2. post up the lan in advance if it is not mandatory, I don't give a fuck! it was an anniversary lan for JMH, 159 pages of post in the special thread for it on our site, if think it is quite enough - we don't need an advertising campaign! 3. serious business? ok do it fully with all the "bad" scores we will report from the bot 4. you are not HWblock : OK - all the score that we may report with a lack of details won't be blocked for sure, just a simple question : WHY? Thx. Quote
jmax_oc Posted April 10, 2009 Posted April 10, 2009 I'm serious when I write it, yes, sure. 200% sure. If you don't block screenshots as incomplete/doubtful as our blocked screenshots, yes, bad words will start. Of course ! How could it be different ? Be punished / moderated whereas other not isn't acceptable from a 'fair' HWBot. I'm not keen of such acts but it can keep HWBot safe, you and me haven't lots of choices... We can ask things differently : what solutions do you suggest ? Our scores remain blocked and other scores not ? In fact, we start to fear that HWBot won't moderate every score with the same way... You can interprete it by different sides : we don't treat you of anything, we respect HWBot (look our activity, you will see that we are very active, trusting your honesty). However, now, we are just waiting what to do depending of what you decide. Finally, don't except us to have 10 scores blocked (total of 200 points) and to see 100 times more scores with same subtests problem. It's not acceptable : Rules have to be applied for everybody. That's the lonely sentense you have to insist on : Rules have to be applied for everybody. Quote
jmax_oc Posted April 10, 2009 Posted April 10, 2009 where? Why is it so important for you !!!??? But here is the link : http://www.jmax-hardware.com/forum/index.php/topic,3821.0.html It could be better to answer us one time : is the subtest rule have to be applicated for everyone ??? We cannot be more precise ! thanks. let me give the same amount then about this subject. If you want, you can leave the problem. Others moderators may answer us. You have to understand that we are clear but HWBot's crew not. You didn't tell us the real rule entirely. You only said 2 things : 1/ subtests mandatory POINT. 2/ subtests mandatory for 'doubtful' scores like 3d01 (mipmap) 3d03 (SLI X58...) Maybe it's the forst time severla members write such 'strong' words so we can understand that you need time to discuss together. Quote
Benji Tshi Posted April 10, 2009 Author Posted April 10, 2009 where? thanks. let me give the same amount then about this subject. http://www.jmax-hardware.com/forum/index.php/topic,3821.0.html I gave this link on the first post, and it was in my previous post (after editing, that's why you didn't see it i guess) Quote
Thor941 Posted April 10, 2009 Posted April 10, 2009 where? thanks. let me give the same amount then about this subject. Don't misquote my sentence, I was talking about having an advertising for the lan party on the bot, it is not the point at all, right? Quote
jmax_oc Posted April 10, 2009 Posted April 10, 2009 Although it's not very smart, I can unstand that we were suspecting of hardware sharing without posting here. We provided proofs and every body understand it. OK, no problem. We also will make announcement here to say in advance that we will have overclocking lan to prevent future problem. OK We also understand that you checked deeply our score since we posted massive screens. It's OK also, we understand. BUT It's not the purpose here.... 10 scores are blocked and we want to know why. If you that they are blocked only because they lack subtests ok but we will reports all results without subtests and we will check if each score is blocked like ours. It's not more complicated : Rules have to be applied for everybody. Nothing more, nothing less. It's up to you to allow all screens without subtests or to block all of them. But, rules have to be applied for everybody. Quote
Crew NeoForce Posted April 10, 2009 Crew Posted April 10, 2009 (edited) Guys, you`re spending time and nerves instead of making good screenshot or posting ORB links - an ONLY THEN you will start talking about justice for all. Be fair to yourself - you provide not enough verification. Your scores are blocked. Right? We have rules for submitting results. Right? You have opportunity to report score if it doesn`t fit rules. Right? Moderators have to check score if it is reported. Right? If this is right , what we are talking about? You`re talking about Libert? et ?galit? Ne pas oublier la fraternit? In my country revolutions are also very popular - but results of them like in France are very miserable You suggest destroying HWBot cause it doesn`t fit your wishes? That`s OK - create alternative, but do not touch things you did not create. ________ No2 Vaporizer Edited May 13, 2011 by NeoForce Quote
Thor941 Posted April 10, 2009 Posted April 10, 2009 And you still don't answer to the simple question about blocking our scores and not the others : WHY? Quote
Crew NeoForce Posted April 10, 2009 Crew Posted April 10, 2009 (edited) Cause there was NO issues about other scores. If you report it - it will be checked and author will be asked for more proof - if no proof - score will be blocked We ask your team for right screens - we don`t receive it - so scores are still blocked. Is it clear? Or I have to write it in Fran?ais? ________ AMERICANSMOKELESS.COM Edited May 13, 2011 by NeoForce Quote
Thor941 Posted April 10, 2009 Posted April 10, 2009 Ha mais on demande que ca! Tu peux donc bloquer celui la : http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=840868 Il est tout frais en premiere page SI tout le monde est traité au meme niveau ya plus aucun soucis pour moi et je dirais meme pour nous, faut etre équitable ./. Quote
Benji Tshi Posted April 10, 2009 Author Posted April 10, 2009 (edited) jmke > The link to our thread was in my first post : Here is our french thread for this bench party : http://www.jmax-hardware.com/forum/index.php/topic,3821.0.html Neoforce > Read us carefully. We understand that our scores are blocked as we don't respect the rules which was established a long time ago. It's not a problem because as you said, there is rules which must be applied. Again, as you said it, we can report scores and moderators will check it. The matter here is that we can't understand why the results won't be blocked if they have the same issues like our ? Moreover, we never suggest to destroy hwbot. At the moment, we prefer solve our problem and continue with hwbot and overclocking. But if hwbot is not fair, we wan't everyone to know this. It's not a destroy as it's only the true. But if we consider your solution is fair (validating our results or not, it's not the problem), we won't do it as we trust hwbot is fair. Our meaning is only to apply rules and be as fair as possible, not to destroy someone or something. We are enjoying hwbot for 2 years, we want to continue of course EDIT : as we won't be able to give you more proofs, our results will remain blocked. So we're gonna try to aplly the rule to every other result which didn't have subtests details. Is it ok for you ? Edited April 10, 2009 by Benji Tshi Quote
jmax_oc Posted April 10, 2009 Posted April 10, 2009 Jmke, Nop. Since we posted pics and vidz, our scores aren't suspicious. True ? If they are now classical benches so they have to be treated like every bench. True ? If they have to be treated like every bench, they have to be valid. True ? If not, explain me where I'm wrong. In your post, you said that scores have to be "doubtful AND without subtests" to be blocked. Neofroce said thing differently... Doubtful isn't a problem for him. Neoforce, HWBock never asked for more proof and wait for proof beforce blocking. HWBot always block and ask proof at the same time. So you say this sequence : no subtests => we report => HWBot block and ask more proof => if proof provided, HWBot unblock. Quote
intouch Posted April 10, 2009 Posted April 10, 2009 Just short question, What do you think about the following ? http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=840832 Is it tolerate ? Quote
Crew NeoForce Posted April 10, 2009 Crew Posted April 10, 2009 (edited) Guys, if you want attract attention to problem - you did it. I also want HWBot to be clear and fair. And every member of hwbot crew also. So you should calm and continue having fun. Thor941 Score is blocked. I can`t see HDD startup at all, so I can`t say if software RAMdisk was used. ________ MEDICAL MARIJUANA PATIENT Edited May 13, 2011 by NeoForce Quote
Crew NeoForce Posted April 10, 2009 Crew Posted April 10, 2009 (edited) intouch Score is not valid - It doesn`t fit any rules ________ Wendie 99 Edited May 13, 2011 by NeoForce Quote
Benji Tshi Posted April 10, 2009 Author Posted April 10, 2009 (edited) Results "are not suspicious" or "are not suspicious anymore" is the same thing. So our results are perfectly fair from this point. Don't talk about it anymore. Be sure you'll have a newspost for each bench party we do now. It's about twice a month, at least. So Hwblock (i think i'm gonna call it this way now as results are blocked and then people think about the suspicion) won't suspect us for sharing anymore. As hwblock won't be fair (i mean applying rules to everyone, and also JMH of course) we won't be quiet, and we won't be able to have fun as our best bench party for 2 years was spoil ! Edited April 10, 2009 by Benji Tshi Quote
Crew NeoForce Posted April 10, 2009 Crew Posted April 10, 2009 (edited) Benji Tshi I want to say - we shouldn`t create such threads and take offence in future. jmax_oc You, me and Massman can talk to each other in Prague next week - I hope it will be good and warm meeting, cause no blocking, boints, screens or marks can spoil fun of benching ________ Electronic Cigarette Edited May 13, 2011 by NeoForce Quote
jmax_oc Posted April 10, 2009 Posted April 10, 2009 no it's not the same thing, otherwise I would write "are not suspicious" or "are not suspicious" and not "are not suspicious anymore" You play with word and rules jmke... Here is the today's list : http://hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=840832'>http://hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=840832 http://hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=840757 http://hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=840678 http://hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=840758 http://hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=840680 http://hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=840759 http://hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=840658 http://hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=840832 http://hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=840700 And my previous list : http://hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=817041 http://hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=809988 http://hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=822758 http://hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=824595 http://hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=831012 http://hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=824985'>http://hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=824985 http://hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=824985 http://hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=827043 http://hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=829464 http://hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=812745 http://hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=832046 All these 20-22 scores lack subtest like our scores. And stop saying our scores are doubtful (hardware sharing) since they are not and since we prove it. Your difference with 'anymore' doesn't mean anything : they are not doubtful. So please consider our score just lack subtest like 20-22 scores mentionned higher. So our scores have to be treated like the 20-22 scores mentioned here. NB : Our previous point of view was that SLI scores + X58 on 2k3 is always doubtful. It seems that the today's decision isn't identical... Neoforce, yes I will spend time with you, Massman and Dami1stm for clarifying the relation between HWBot and us but no to clarify this situation... It's too far (10 days). No offence of course but Prague won't be the solution for this problem . Quote
Benji Tshi Posted April 10, 2009 Author Posted April 10, 2009 You're looking for details which can bother me ? Scores were suspicious because of sharing, we proove it was not, you (moderators) believed that there was not, so it's not suspicious ! Quote
Crew NeoForce Posted April 10, 2009 Crew Posted April 10, 2009 (edited) jmax_oc I look at first two scores - they are not valid - blocked. ________ No2 vaporizer review Edited May 13, 2011 by NeoForce Quote
spainis Posted April 10, 2009 Posted April 10, 2009 someone took my candy and now I cry like a little baby ROFL ROFL ROFL Quote
Thor941 Posted April 10, 2009 Posted April 10, 2009 someone took my candy and now I cry like a little baby ROFL ROFL ROFL Pathetic isn't it? Quote
jmax_oc Posted April 10, 2009 Posted April 10, 2009 jmax_oc I look at first two scores - they are not valid - blocked. And do you think it's the good solution to clean thousand of incomplete scores ? Me not. I think that subtests can only be mandatory in heavy doubtful setup (like Quad CF 4870X2 on 3d03 for example.... We saw 200k several times). And subtests have to be just useful but not mandatory in 99,99% of user's scores. But Neoforce, look what you do and lok what jmke do. It's not the same thing. 1/ You block each score who lack subtests. No exception. 2/ Jmke blocked only 'doubtful' scores who lack subtests. But his 'doubtful' definition isn't clear. For the 2 members, I have nothing against you. If you feel sad seeing this, just post here. Quote
spainis Posted April 10, 2009 Posted April 10, 2009 Pathetic isn't it? pathetic is your whining Quote
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.