sacha35 Posted June 6, 2009 Author Share Posted June 6, 2009 Please don't change to political correctness now. You say that this is an example of how hwbot is corrupt and that example just happened to be mine, hence I'm setting an example for how corrupt hwbot is. Doesn't matter how long I've been corrupt, what matters is that you think I am now. If you think I'm not being corrupt now, there's no reason why you should state that this shows how corrupt hwbot is. It's either 0 or 1, not 0.5. I have followed the hwbot rules as everyone else does. If anything, I follow them more than most of the benchers out there, because I know I have a responsibility as a moderator. Please do ask my team mates how I stress the hwbot rules in joined sessions. And what if Gigabyte lends me the cpu and doesn't ask it back for a while? Is it alright then? What if I have an agreement with Intel on this? Since when is it prohibited to bench together? As long as you follow the rules, there's no issue. Intel would not let Gigabyte loan you or anyone else any of there CPU as they have rules. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Massman Posted June 6, 2009 Share Posted June 6, 2009 That's not the question. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sacha35 Posted June 6, 2009 Author Share Posted June 6, 2009 That's not the question. What is the Question ? I thought the rules where clear saying if you owned a CPU then you could use it yourself for everything or let some use it for only for 3D, but as Gigabyte owned the CPU then how could you submit system benchmarks with it, and again as it was a joint effort how can only one person claim the points where they should be shared between each of you in one team only not as an individual. I am not going to say anymore about this but I take it from now on that we can all use any hardware that we want with no regards to whom owned it providing only one person clams the points. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Massman Posted June 6, 2009 Share Posted June 6, 2009 "What If I have an agreement with Intel, can I submit the score then?" and following that question: "Can I submit the GTX260 vantage score if I have an agreement with Nvidia?" There's no such thing as you being allowed to use whatever hardware. If YOU bench with hardware also used by someone else you are breaking the rules. It's funny to see how you bring up an issue trying to get things fair and end up stating they'll just do the same. What's up with that? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
knopflerbruce Posted June 6, 2009 Share Posted June 6, 2009 I thought the rules were pretty clear - borrowed CPUs for 2D are not allowed. Or did I miss something? IMO there is no difference if it's Intel or Joe the Tweaker downtown who lets someone have a chip for a session, it still is the same - a borrowed CPU. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Massman Posted June 6, 2009 Share Posted June 6, 2009 http://hwbot.org/forum/showpost.php?p=14538&postcount=26 This is a response to BazX regarding the question if he was allowed to submit scores obtained from a Skulltrail rig lend to him by Intel. http://hwbot.org/forum/showpost.php?p=14815&postcount=151 Clarification of the rules regarding sharing, including the exception with review hardware Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
t0mz0r Posted June 6, 2009 Share Posted June 6, 2009 Going along the lines of what gets posted here, that would render the entire server processor results on wprime1024 invalid too? I dont get what the fuzz is about Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gautam Posted June 6, 2009 Share Posted June 6, 2009 At the end of the day we need to step back and think about what the rules are for. As far as I'm concerned, if someone put in effort for a score, they deserve points, and hardware sharing rules are in place to prevent people from taking points for someone else's work...no? I think you're going a bit overboard with this Paul. Rules and regulations are important but for what end if we lose sight of what truly matters? massman and Pt1t got a great 32M run off. Who cares about where the hardware came from or who it "belongs" to anyways? I think if we waste time arguing over such technicalities, we quickly forget about the true spirit of competitive overclocking, something that's happening all too often these days. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sam__ Posted June 6, 2009 Share Posted June 6, 2009 At the end of the day we need to step back and think about what the rules are for. As far as I'm concerned, if someone put in effort for a score, they deserve points, and hardware sharing rules are in place to prevent people from taking points for someone else's work...no? I think you're going a bit overboard with this Paul. Rules and regulations are important but for what end if we lose sight of what truly matters? massman and Pt1t got a great 32M run off. Who cares about where the hardware came from or who it "belongs" to anyways? I think if we waste time arguing over such technicalities, we quickly forget about the true spirit of competitive overclocking, something that's happening all too often these days. the man has a point. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SF3D Posted June 6, 2009 Share Posted June 6, 2009 True Gautum! I just have to wonder where all this is coming from? If someone got CPU for review purposes and would have done the same score, nobody would have cared. Then someone does the same thing under time limitations and huge pressure form other teams and the score should not be posted anywhere. Why? Because it is too good or the "loan" period is only 2 days. I just don't get what this whole thread is all about. I have asked valid arguments for this issue and there is none so far. To Bazx. It is not your business to track what is my status on the site or on this forum. I guess you did not read the news back then. I stopped moderating HOF (Top 20) scores, but my status/rights here are still the same. You and your past arguments does not have anything to do with it. Sorry. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sacha35 Posted June 6, 2009 Author Share Posted June 6, 2009 At the end of the day we need to step back and think about what the rules are for. As far as I'm concerned, if someone put in effort for a score, they deserve points, and hardware sharing rules are in place to prevent people from taking points for someone else's work...no? I think you're going a bit overboard with this Paul. Rules and regulations are important but for what end if we lose sight of what truly matters? massman and Pt1t got a great 32M run off. Who cares about where the hardware came from or who it "belongs" to anyways? I think if we waste time arguing over such technicalities, we quickly forget about the true spirit of competitive overclocking, something that's happening all too often these days. Hi Gautam I was not making a big thing of this but just trying to clear the rules up for everyone, it is great to see such results from hardware like this and I for one would love to see more as it shows the amount of hardwork that has gone into this bench and clock speed. My argument was that I thought only one person could bench/submit as a single user or they must join forces and bench together and submit results under a joint name like benchbros do. Anyway I have said I do not want to say anymore about this and am happy for the result to stay as long as all other members here on Hwbot can do the same as what has been done. All I am asking for is farness for all teams and members. I think Hwbot as said many times is a big success in that it has grown far bigger than anyone would have ever thought and it would be great to have an affiliated fully regulated site looking at all members submissions now as I think it has outgrown what can be fully moderated by its own success. Anyway I will say this again I am sorry if I have upset anyone but I would like all the rules to apply to everyone here so that we all have the same benefits and gains as everybody else. As far as I am concerned this matter is closed now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
knopflerbruce Posted June 6, 2009 Share Posted June 6, 2009 borrow a CPU from friend who has submitted results to the database, to earn HWBoints in 2D is indeed not allowed.benching a CPU in a bench session which has no previous records at the HWBot and you are only one submitting results with that CPU... no issue. OK, small difference there;) Thanks. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bazx Posted June 7, 2009 Share Posted June 7, 2009 To Bazx. It is not your business to track what is my status on the site or on this forum. I guess you did not read the news back then. I stopped moderating HOF (Top 20) scores, but my status/rights here are still the same. You and your past arguments does not have anything to do with it. Sorry. i am a member here the same as you and as such it is my business who moderates @ the hwbot so lets be clear if you hold a position of power here and can make decisions that could affect the future direction of hwbot it is very much my business that said i have no interest in revisiting past arguments over your status SF3D good luck with the future baz Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IanCutress Posted June 7, 2009 Share Posted June 7, 2009 Im borrowing some stuff in a while, but its from a guy who doesnt bench, so its not an issue, This is what I came to the conclusion with - you can use it if it's not yours if the person (or company) who owns it doesn't intend to bench. Massman and pt1t used stuff owned by Gigabyte/Intel, but Gigabyte/Intel not going to use it for benching themselves. As long as only one of them posts the score, then it's fine. It doesn't have to be posted under a joint name - only one of them needs to post it. If someone else and I did some benching, any scores we got would be valid, but as long as only one of us submits it, then it's in the rules. At least that's how I've interpreted it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bustah Posted June 7, 2009 Share Posted June 7, 2009 This is what I came to the conclusion with - you can use it if it's not yours if the person (or company) who owns it doesn't intend to bench. Massman and pt1t used stuff owned by Gigabyte/Intel, but Gigabyte/Intel not going to use it for benching themselves. As long as only one of them posts the score, then it's fine. It doesn't have to be posted under a joint name - only one of them needs to post it. If someone else and I did some benching, any scores we got would be valid, but as long as only one of us submits it, then it's in the rules. At least that's how I've interpreted it. unfortunately I think this is where the rules get fuzzy. for example if say a top bencher here who gets support from a company and is sent x amount of cpus, early through His selection process He finds a cpu that Hes gonna bench/submit results with, He could then in theory pass a cpu to a team member to bench with because He himself is technically not benching with it? That to me is hardware sharing or would be, just an example. Massman has done nothing wrong here I think that is concluded. the problem in my eyes is the confusion around the hardware sharing rule...what is and what isnt allowed its all a bit sketchy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bustah Posted June 7, 2009 Share Posted June 7, 2009 (edited) correct borandi! from : http://hwbot.org/hwbot.post.do?postId=1038 there is no issue with your example; top bencher get multiple CPUs, keeps one, uses it for HWBot results; passes along the others, since he did not bench them, they can be used by a single person for HWbot; that is NOT hardware sharing. if he sends his golden CPU to all his teammates and they all use it for 2D benches, then it is HW sharing;) it's really not that hardware to follow; the HWbot database should only have results from unique HW only; so having multiple results from the same hardware, benched by different people, is always breaching the rules;) this is why its confusing, I thought you had to own the hardware yourself? is your diagram intended for idiots to understand jmke? Imo if this is the case it makes it very easy for dishonest ppl to bend the rules does'nt it? no way to regulate that so why have the rule in the first place. I understand that hwbot relies on ppl being honest but the sad truth is not everyone is thats the way of the world. thats why rules are needed? Edited June 7, 2009 by BUSTAMOVE Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gantevebis_vaci Posted June 7, 2009 Share Posted June 7, 2009 how in the hell you want to prove the used cpu? please tell me Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
knopflerbruce Posted June 7, 2009 Share Posted June 7, 2009 correct borandi! from : http://hwbot.org/hwbot.post.do?postId=1038 there is no issue with your example; top bencher get multiple CPUs, keeps one, uses it for HWBot results; passes along the others, since he did not bench them, they can be used by a single person for HWbot; that is NOT hardware sharing. if he sends his golden CPU to all his teammates and they all use it for 2D benches, then it is HW sharing;) it's really not that hardware to follow; the HWbot database should only have results from unique HW only; so having multiple results from the same hardware, benched by different people, is always breaching the rules;) It's allowed to buy HW that has been used here before. That's what I've been told at least... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sam__ Posted June 7, 2009 Share Posted June 7, 2009 and even if you do get a unique number for each cpu/gpu, people sell them on, both parties should be able to bench a piece of hardware. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sacha35 Posted June 8, 2009 Author Share Posted June 8, 2009 how come nobody ever raised hell like this when Kingpin submitted this result he got at NVISION in 2008? http://hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=775800 Do you think all the hardware he used was his? Or might he have been sponsored? I brought this up was that if we all remember rightly No-Name had most of all his points removed because he benched with someone at an event and took all the points for the work done between the two guys, so if this is the case here what is the difference? I think Kingpin is totally different in that he did do this event but for Nvision but it was only him so what is the problem for him taking the points. like when I did the i33 event, I was given the M/B to test but because it was a joint effort I made sure the points went to the team as a joint effort and did not take any points for myself. Anyway I don't know why you have brought this up again As I said what I have said and am happy for this to just go away now Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crew Vivi Posted June 8, 2009 Crew Share Posted June 8, 2009 Basically, if you are cought you are fu**ed, we work on honesty and trust here. There are 10 000 users who watch over results, i don't think cheated results in top 20 would get away easily. as for sharing its tough to counter but also not so hard to spot, Massman's score is legit though this site is to upload good scores and he did :? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Massman Posted June 8, 2009 Share Posted June 8, 2009 That score will be beaten anyhow, so ... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gantevebis_vaci Posted June 8, 2009 Share Posted June 8, 2009 i think hwbot tries to controll something,that nobody can controll also only trusted and heavyweight people are in top100 and i would just trust them 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.