Gothrek Posted May 24, 2009 Share Posted May 24, 2009 Can any moderator recheck my scores and unblock them please? I made some small error in the validation of the scores, but if you understand the benches and compare them against other scores, you know they are correct http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=774236 http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=767928 http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=773892 http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=767926 http://www.hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=774309 A lot of thanks in advance Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
knopflerbruce Posted May 24, 2009 Share Posted May 24, 2009 sorry but those scores were blocked with valid reasons as the screenshot did not show some crucial information. there is no "new" policy in effect, we made public what the moderators have been doing for months now; only way to get a score unblocked is by uploading correct validation for the score. Isn't there a rule that says that blocking just for blocking is not "fair play"? That there should be reasonable doubt about the scores? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gothrek Posted May 24, 2009 Author Share Posted May 24, 2009 Valid reasons? A reason like this: ow your memory timings are not displayed => block... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gothrek Posted May 24, 2009 Author Share Posted May 24, 2009 2009-01-02 09:07:12.0 - (crew) Woomack: insufficient verification for rankings (no memory info) .... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
knopflerbruce Posted May 24, 2009 Share Posted May 24, 2009 Is the score off in a way that it's likely that a different resolution was being used? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gothrek Posted May 24, 2009 Author Share Posted May 24, 2009 No, it is not off, just compare it to others people scores and their clocks, it is just that i forgot to show the resolution, i only have small screen and this seemed to be the best way to show everything in 1 screen, stupid i forgot about the resolution Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Massman Posted May 25, 2009 Share Posted May 25, 2009 Insufficient verification can always lead to blocking a score. We try to take into account more than just the sole error in verification to judge about whether or not a block is justified, for instance what is missing and how high the score is ranked within its category, but this sometimes less strict blocking policy can come across as unfair or not logical is some cases. For instance in this one. Know that we will stick this moderation policy: we do not intend to block pointlessly, so in some cases we allow minor mistakes. I'd say, make sure everything is in order in terms of verification to minimize the risk of getting a score blocked. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gothrek Posted May 25, 2009 Author Share Posted May 25, 2009 Ok, i understand why my 3Dmark scores are blocked, but why is a Superpi run blocked when the memory timings are not shown? You know the frequency of the CPU, the FSB everything except the memory timings, it is not like a superpi score cannot be validated without memory timings. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gothrek Posted May 25, 2009 Author Share Posted May 25, 2009 So my score was just blocked for the case of being blocked... In 3D i can understand it is blocked as vital information as the resolution is hidden, but in Superpi the memory timings are not vital, so i don't understand why it is such a big deal Right now, i certainly don't understand why there was any post on the main site regarding a new policy, since i don't see any change Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gothrek Posted May 25, 2009 Author Share Posted May 25, 2009 again i don't see any reason why memory timings should be mandatory Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Massman Posted May 25, 2009 Share Posted May 25, 2009 Because it can give valuable information when moderation doubtful results. In addition, the memory tab also gives information about the Uncore and NB frequency of i7 and Phenom. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gothrek Posted May 26, 2009 Author Share Posted May 26, 2009 Hence, it is a stupid rule.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
r1ch Posted May 26, 2009 Share Posted May 26, 2009 Gothrek, you're fighting a losing battle and I doubt anyone will agree with you. Memory sub-timings can have a huge impact on a superpi 1m run, let alone a 32m run. To dispute that is just crazy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gothrek Posted May 26, 2009 Author Share Posted May 26, 2009 Gothrek, you're fighting a losing battle and I doubt anyone will agree with you. Memory sub-timings can have a huge impact on a superpi 1m run, let alone a 32m run. To dispute that is just crazy. True, they have a huge effect on the score, but without memtimings your score cannot be validated? how stupid is that? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Massman Posted May 26, 2009 Share Posted May 26, 2009 True, they have a huge effect on the score, but without memtimings your score cannot be validated? how stupid is that? Not being validated on Hwbot is not per definition an invalid score. It just means the verification does not comply with the rules applied here on hwbot. Why this rule has been set in place doesn't matter in this case. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
knopflerbruce Posted May 26, 2009 Share Posted May 26, 2009 If memory is so important, how come one can still upload wprime scores that has no timings? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gothrek Posted May 27, 2009 Author Share Posted May 27, 2009 It is not like memory timings will change your PI score by more then a second.... Still, better scores should not be explained at all, if the pic is valid, the score should be considered as valid, simple as that Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Massman Posted May 27, 2009 Share Posted May 27, 2009 (edited) Still, better scores should not be explained at all, if the pic is valid, the score should be considered as valid, simple as that I just ran the 100m sprint in my backyard in 5 seconds and even have a stopwatch picture to prove it (since we only need the score). Is it a world record? How can you run a database of 17000 members, of 300k scores without having a few solid ground rules? It's a matter of making it easier for everyone: moderators, but more importantly the people who compete. Without information such as memory timings and NB/Uncore clock frequencies, it VERY difficult to see why a certain score is faster. Furthermore, you said it yourself: "IF the pic is valid, the score should be considered valid". Hwbot consideres a SPI picture valid, IF the memory tab is included. If NOT, it's NOT valid and should therefore not be considered valid either. Note that this is only in terms of Hwbot-validity, which is different from validity in general. What are we discussing here exactly? How moderation should work, if the memory tab is a necessity, how the rules of hwbot have been created or if your scores should be unblocked? Edited May 27, 2009 by Massman Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gothrek Posted May 30, 2009 Author Share Posted May 30, 2009 my score is not so important, i just think it is a bit of a stupid rule, but i will just photoshop some memory timings in that screenshot, so you all can be happy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Massman Posted May 30, 2009 Share Posted May 30, 2009 my score is not so important, i just think it is a bit of a stupid rule, but i will just photoshop some memory timings in that screenshot, so you all can be happy Sure, we'll be more happy: one user less to check scores from Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gothrek Posted June 2, 2009 Author Share Posted June 2, 2009 maybe you didn't notice, but i was being sarcastic..... 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.