Reflect on the proposition: Would you create a new project phase with badge and all the overhead that comes with it, if the 'phase' were an estimated 5000 runtime years (70-80 days at FAHV speed)? Would you do so if the estimate is 50,000 years? Would you do so if you had no estimate at all how many re-scorings would have to be done, open ended? Would you even not bring it to the grid if no firm estimate can be made that ensures there's 6 months a year of computing, continuous or DDDT2 intermittent type? I've read [when we CA's were still getting occasional updates], of a project that was pulled as in the end it proofed just 3 weeks work. In short, it [BEDAM on the grid] not happening at all is a real possibility.

I hope it does come to WCG. Projects are getting a bit thin on the ground round here now.

nope...but if nothing NEW comes till November (estimated MCM finish), then it wil be THIN!

btw, it would be nice if WCG would give users an info about new projects sent to them...4 example (italics r d in):
- project MERS, sent from University Berlin, papers 25% done
- project Tubrculosis, sent from University Turin, paper 75% done
- project Encefilatis, sent from University Zagreb, paper 50% done
- project Hepatitis, sent from University San Francisco, paper 100% done

so we could see which Uni/Collage or some Institution has submited projects...how far did they come with papers documentation 4 WCG...or they r in a program development phase!

6M-1Yr I think it is for a continuous stream. The 100 year badge levels has made the hurdle only harder for those that don't have horsepower to do a sapphire in 6M as then you need 4 cores 24/7 to even get 2YR. All the more reason not to go overboard on allowing much more than 35 IP per core, as else the daily pool of a limit availability project would be sucked dry before you can ;) an eye.

I think SekeRob was saying pretty much not to increase to more than 35.