Moose83 Posted January 7, 2013 Share Posted January 7, 2013 (edited) Of course! It was written, thins October 2012!!! When Staff not know the rules, who should know them then? And in this scores is much more wrong than the simply result.txt! Lol, you also have removed the old rules counting since October 2012.... Really nice move, what the hell... Edited January 7, 2013 by Moose83 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crew pro Posted January 7, 2013 Crew Share Posted January 7, 2013 As of jan 1st? What about the "As of October something or other" top20 HW or Global need it, in the other thread?Everybody was being held to that thread as law, up till ney. We've all always been held to threads as law. WTF? I should have made things clearer, I was not aware of Sweet posting the requirement for FM link for top 20 global AND HARDWARE, I take total responsibility for the confusion of both HWbot members and staff, I should have had my head around this information I will get Sweet to REMOVE his post regarding validation requirement for top 20 hardware, as the official rule page only asks for validation for top 20 global Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crew Sweet Posted January 8, 2013 Author Crew Share Posted January 8, 2013 (edited) All new submits keep the rules with result.txt and verification since then! C.Ney posted one outside the rules, then Sweet and now rules are changed so this submits counts??? Have moderators an special position to make there on rules to keep there results? I dont unterstand rules on hwbot anymore, maybee no more rules? Now my sub is with no pints, if you want, I delete this no problem, like i write before this is my last Pcm'05, no run anymore this benchmark. I'm so sorry if this has annoyed , that's not my intention. I run this, sometime ago, this is the last here. Alex - Sweet I should have made things clearer, I was not aware of Sweet posting the requirement for FM link for top 20 global AND HARDWARE, I take total responsibility for the confusion of both HWbot members and staff, I should have had my head around this information I will get Sweet to REMOVE his post regarding validation requirement for top 20 hardware, as the official rule page only asks for validation for top 20 global Done bro, i think is not your fault, maybe i dont remember comment that in the pcmark rules, my intention was always that everyone can use this benchmark with the same opportunities, I hope this is so. Edited January 8, 2013 by Sweet Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moose83 Posted January 8, 2013 Share Posted January 8, 2013 You must not delete it. But you personally fight for clear rules and show it on your Sig, so i dont unterstand, why you didnt use it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr.Scott Posted January 8, 2013 Share Posted January 8, 2013 Now my sub is with no pints, if you want, I delete this no problem, like i write before this is my last Pcm'05, no run anymore this benchmark. I'm so sorry if this has annoyed , that's not my intention. I run this, sometime ago, this is the last here. Alex - Sweet You're absolved Alex. Like you, I stay away. PCM05 is just a clusterfuck now, even with clarified rules. There will always be loopholes. Best to just walk away. Stay honest mi amigo. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crew Sweet Posted January 8, 2013 Author Crew Share Posted January 8, 2013 (edited) You must not delete it. But you personally fight for clear rules and show it on your Sig, so i dont unterstand, why you didnt use it. Yes bro, you are right thats my faul, this run was the last i think in september run this 641, just a sentimental goodbye, for the last pcm'05 that i run. Too much hours to look tweaks, too much hours with the hdd change, too much hours to test, and finally too much hours wirh ssd's. You know, at this moment Pcm'05 is so heavy, so i say good bye to this bench. @Scotty , thanks mate, in this moment i'm so tired with the overclocking, my vacations in my job have arrived (summertime vacations), i think that i need sometime to get back to OC. Regards my brothers. Abrazos mis hermanos Moose and Scotty, and be good See you soon Edited January 8, 2013 by Sweet Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moose83 Posted January 8, 2013 Share Posted January 8, 2013 Its bad to here that Alex You fight for the rules and they where applyed, thanks for that Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bobnova Posted January 12, 2013 Share Posted January 12, 2013 So does this mean that only rules on the main rules pages have to be followed? No more rules existing only in threads and still being enforced? That would make HWBot a lot easier to keep track of, if it's true. It hasn't in the past, which has been an issue, and the sudden (unannounced...) change now to only-the-rules-page-matters setup is good. Getting there because a moderator ran afoul of the thread rules and changing whether thread rules matter or not to suit that moderator... less so. So the question is: Do thread rules matter now, or is it only the main rules pages? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crew Leeghoofd Posted January 13, 2013 Crew Share Posted January 13, 2013 Thread rules are more to finalise or an aid in making decisions in new rule tinkering via input of the overclockers... Indeed the benchmark rules should be directly updated on the main page, once a decison has been made. Not like it has happened last year. But Pro is in full control now, he watches this thread and PCmark 24/7 from now on... go James go ! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
knopflerbruce Posted January 13, 2013 Share Posted January 13, 2013 Yeah, the official rules are the ones linked to on the main page - nothing else. Otherwise there would be a double standard - forum people go by forum rules and the others by the main site rules, which is not the way we should do things. On the other hand - if there are grey area situations that are covered only in the forum, follow whatever we say here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr.Scott Posted January 13, 2013 Share Posted January 13, 2013 (edited) Yeah, the official rules are the ones linked to on the main page - nothing else. Otherwise there would be a double standard - forum people go by forum rules and the others by the main site rules, which is not the way we should do things. On the other hand - if there are grey area situations that are covered only in the forum, follow whatever we say here. Lolwut?? "Follow the main page rules, but if there's a grey area follow what we say in the forums." This whole statement is an endless contradictory circle. PUT THE FREAKIN RULES ON THE MAIN PAGE AND STICK TO 'EM. or kill the bench and put an end to this charade completely. Edited January 13, 2013 by Mr.Scott Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
knopflerbruce Posted January 13, 2013 Share Posted January 13, 2013 I said: FOLLOW THE FREAKIN RULES ON THE MAIN PAGE. Sometimes people come up with things that are not clearly legal or not (in ALL benchmarks, not just pcm05). By your reasoning we can't reply before we've investigated it, which won't happen overnight. The other option is that we give some advice based on some initial thoughts when you guys ask - that's what I'm referring to. We can't foresee every misinterpretation of the main page rules (this thread is an excellent example), so we have to step in and clarify some things (aka grey areas). To some of you, the TW tweaks and codec replacements were possibly grey area - but in reality they were all manipulating the benchmark in ways not allowed by the general gules. There's no need to retire a benchmark because people cannot judge a tweak based on a clear set of rules. That's really the main problem here, we have to babysit what people do because they can't make proper judgements themselves (raidXpert sector size for example). Sorry if I sound harsh. Just trying to be a bit clear Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr.Scott Posted January 13, 2013 Share Posted January 13, 2013 Sometimes it takes 'harsh'. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bobnova Posted January 13, 2013 Share Posted January 13, 2013 Does a verification link supersede the need for results.txt in the SS? In the thread (last time I looked) if you had a link you did not need results.txt, the main rules page doesn't mention it. What's the call on that one? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
XtremeCuztoms Posted January 14, 2013 Share Posted January 14, 2013 Does a verification link supersede the need for results.txt in the SS?In the thread (last time I looked) if you had a link you did not need results.txt, the main rules page doesn't mention it. What's the call on that one? Since October 24, 2012 - New (thanks SteveRo) Until the wrapper are ready 1. Futuremark link -ORB-required for all top 20 submissions global 2. For all non-top 20 submissions either Futuremark link or Pcm05 Results.txt required via screen shot. 3. Include real pictures of your rig, specifically storage and cooling. This is Mandatory for all submissions in PcMark'05 If you use ORB link, screenshot basic is equally mandatory So I'd say if you sub is top 20 Global you need ORB Link, otherwise results.txt Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Massman Posted January 14, 2013 Share Posted January 14, 2013 Result.txt is an essential part of the verification screenshot and the ORB validation link is not an alternative. I think the official rules also say this (if not, let me know how I can make it more clear). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crew Sweet Posted January 14, 2013 Author Crew Share Posted January 14, 2013 For those who ask, "where is the. txt file" ? Inside the OcMark'05 folder following this route: C - programs files - futuremark - PcMark'05 Make a shortcut in your desktop, if you want. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TerraRaptor Posted January 14, 2013 Share Posted January 14, 2013 So sad pcmark rules change often - i just deleted the Jan13 sub because I was not aware of this .txt requirement. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crew Sweet Posted January 15, 2013 Author Crew Share Posted January 15, 2013 Guys, As you can read in the rules of the PCM'05. since 01/01/2013 is mandatory the .txt file, this has been agreed with all in this thread, where everyone can give their opinion and show new ideas to make this benchmark is more equal for all. This benchmark will survive if we all aim to give you a sense, instead die if we continue degrading this. Probably soon ORBs are no longer available, it is possible for a discharge, is a very old benchmark, is for that reason that we demand. txt on screen. regards Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
samt.bsb Posted January 15, 2013 Share Posted January 15, 2013 hi,i have some result with no .txt before 2013 but i edit them after 1/1/2013 cos of problem in calculation(http://hwbot.org/forum/private.php?do=showpm&pmid=43050).and now i don't have some cpu that i used in pcm05 .one of user mr.scott report my submission.and i dont know what i do now.please help me ,thank you and good lock. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crew Sweet Posted January 15, 2013 Author Crew Share Posted January 15, 2013 Please samt.bsb, show me the link Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
samt.bsb Posted January 17, 2013 Share Posted January 17, 2013 hi,thank you dear my friend sweet for reading my message .i think my submissions are delete . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
samt.bsb Posted January 17, 2013 Share Posted January 17, 2013 dear friend when i am login all of message for report submissions are gone Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
samt.bsb Posted January 17, 2013 Share Posted January 17, 2013 its all link,http://hwbot.org/submission/2341377_samt.bsb_pcmark_2005_core_i5_2500k_31454_marks,http://hwbot.org/submission/2341904_samt.bsb_pcmark_2005_core_2_e6600_%282.4ghz%29_12497_marks,the date and time of my computer was incorrect cos of resetting bios and forget to correct it.(pcmark05 E6600).http://hwbot.org/submission/2342194_samt.bsb_pcmark_2005_core_i5_2410m_10228_marks,http://hwbot.org/submission/2342133_samt.bsb_pcmark_2005_core_i5_3570k_32302_marks, Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
samt.bsb Posted January 17, 2013 Share Posted January 17, 2013 thank you for check my submitions my friend,and for your help,hope to see you better in your life and work my friend sweet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts