mmmm. OK then jonnie, lets all join hands.....

....is there anybody there.....

I feel sure that back awhile machines used to regularly benchmark to confirm that points were being distributed well and that anything that fell outside of a given percentage would fail and institute some kind of re-calibration. I guess that was turned off as I have been seeing over 10 fold variance in points claimed/awarded on this single project

I just had a look at my scores. About a month ago my points per hour were in the region of 60 pph. My most recent vina gave me a whopping 7.7 pph. Like most of us, I feel the points are not that important, as long as I am contributing to something worthwhile. But I do agree this needs to be sorted because unreasonable low pph make me grumpy. The pph for autodocks are stable - why shouldn't they be for vina's. I guess all I am saying is I am ready for the next beta

The credit system is complete loony bins. CEP2 used to fetch me 20-35/hour depending on which of the 2 machines, but now is doing 3-7 credit per hour. Fahv on linux used to do about 35 credit per hour and is now mostly doing 12 something.

Running some analysis against projects here's a crackpot record from beta:

02/26/2014 0:002:19:17:30 1,763,870 1,976

1976 results for 1763870 points or 892 points per result which is not anything special. If you though consider 67.75 hours total, you get to 26034 points per hour. Was not there to sneak some off.

By the looks of the issue, this iceberg is of a high salt content type as 99% of the problem appears to be ignored and for a very long time.

I am also having problems with Vina WU's on my Linux boxes since last weekend. I see an unpredictable variance in actual completion time as compared to the estimated time for completion. Some WU's can take up to 2.5-3x the original estimated completion time, depending on the rig. The strange thing is that of the limited number of Vina WU's that I've checked on my W7 laptop and desktop for actual completion times, they almost all seem to correlate fairly well with the estimated times for completion, with a small degree of variance. However the sample size is small for this observation, so I am not sure how well it will hold up over a large number.

I don't mind longer WU's, but it would be greatly appreciated if the number of points awarded was in proportion to the computing time. And I"m not talking about this for XRP's. I need to know how badly OC and Mama are beating me on a daily basis.