Diabolique Posted October 31, 2009 Share Posted October 31, 2009 http://hwbot.org/signature.img?iid=110590&thumb=false This score is moderated. How? http://hwbot.org/listResults.do?cpuModelId=919&applicationId=3&filterUser=true&filterBlocked=true&limit=100 1. 4. 7. All from same team. How to know this is not same processor? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
knopflerbruce Posted October 31, 2009 Share Posted October 31, 2009 (edited) http://hwbot.org/forum/showthread.php?t=3859 Consistency => block. I also had a few blocked scores a few months ago because of a missing memory tab (could only open one cpuz window...), and if thats a reason to block then this definately is. Plus, this score is #1. IMO #1 scores should ALWAYS have proper screenshots. That's the one most people look at, and alot of folks will wonder why there is no proof of CPUZ type there... The CPUZ window is without a doubt the most important validation part, except for the score itself of course, and if that's not mandatory then you can't really moderate other scores at all:) Edited October 31, 2009 by knopflerbruce Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
knopflerbruce Posted October 31, 2009 Share Posted October 31, 2009 that score you linked to in that thread. that score receives no HWboints but most importantly he ran SUPERPI 1.4 !! there's a difference between not having a memory tab open and running the wrong benchmark version Massman's arguments were not about the version, but about how important this tab actually is. In fact, this can be any dual core conroe/wolfdale - we can't tell. If his suicide shot is at 5133, I would think the cpuz speed was a bit lower than that. If you can allow the first spot in a category that has 1174 results to be without a CPUZ tab you can ignore that rule for top 20 global submissions as well. Will that ever happen? I hope not. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
knopflerbruce Posted October 31, 2009 Share Posted October 31, 2009 http://hwbot.org/forum/showthread.php?t=2299 The thread I made at the time. Deleted the scores after a while as I was tired of seeing them highlighted every time I looked at my profile. 1.5 years is alot of time, but the missing tab is important to be able to verify what chip that was actually used. So... after 1.5 years we don't give a crap about ANY issues, whatsoever? wPrime v1.58 results from early 2008 - I would think the same argument is valid. ("This score was number one since start in 30 April 2008, it never received global points; so less scrutiny ; however don't come nagging 1.5 years later for that same score. that just doesn't work") Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
knopflerbruce Posted October 31, 2009 Share Posted October 31, 2009 To sum it up: we need better guidelines, I think. Will reupload the scores later if I find them Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
knopflerbruce Posted October 31, 2009 Share Posted October 31, 2009 Uhm? I found them for you? http://hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=784107 http://hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=784106 http://hwbot.org/result.do?resultId=784108 !! that's 3.6pts waiting for you:) the guidelines are clear now, on the rules page; scores without Global Points can be exempt if they are not suspicious to begin with check PM Well done, Sherlock:woot: Can you just reactivate them? Or do I have to add them again? 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.