What really bites is selecting a project to run and then forgetting to disable the option to Run Other Projects, if no choice tasks are available *; especially when the computer downloads 15 tasks you dont want to run!
It is easy to forget this tick box because you have to scroll down to find it, and your brain is saying I have already made the changes I want to make.

Such user mistakes were probably exasperated towards the end of NRW, and presently by the intermittency of the DDDT2 project. This intermittent nature of DDDT2 is set to continue for the duration of the project, so such user errors are set to continue, and are more likely with inexperienced users. Should the African Climate project ever re-emerge it may be that it will be intermittent too (or have limited tasks).

* If there is no work available for my computer for the projects I have selected above, please send me work from another project.
- This should really read from any other project - it is not an other project, it is any other!

I agree with having a Dont Run This Task option (not that it is a real choice with project wide balancing still in place), but perhaps there could be a run alternative task(s) box (and an option to select a secondary project, or more than one) if the selected projects have no work.

The WCG should appreciate that when people decide to run tasks for a project it is because they want to support that project. Not everyone wants the WCG to completely decide what projects are fit to run on their behalf, and load balance any choice they make out the window is disrespectful if not dishonest.

This is about choice for the cruncher to really support whatever projects they want.
So far I have crunched for just about every project presented (and which the server decided I should received tasks for), but it did take some persuading for some projects:
I wanted to know more about the NRW project before I chose to run it, because I was concerned that big businesses might exploit the findings; once again sell GM crops to countries - making them dependent on non seed crops and then hiking the prices beyond affordability causing more famines. An on-going act of greed and evil, in my opinion. When I was assured that this would not happen for NRW I ran the project. When I considered the merits of nutrition from a medical perspective, and how it would help prevent many illnesses, I ran it more than the others, and reached 5years.
Some people did not want to support climate modelling or green energy research, or just wanted to concentrate on HCC for example. I was not so sure about running African Climate, as I was already running Climate Prediction, and was concerned at the limitations of the model (I only received 2 tasks, so my opinion mattered little).

Why cant this cruncher-choice be better respected?

I want a do not run this project option and to see the end of project balancing; real cruncher-choice.

a priority system may be the best idea, something like, check for work in this order, dddt2, hpf2, hcmd2, anything else. maybe a 0 to 5 scale for each project, 0 never, 1 first, 2 second, etc. being able to set several projects to i.e. 1