I could write for over an hour on the reasons why WCG has, in my opinion, failed (yet I am still here) but my 2 very quick points:

1)WCG failed by NOT very actively AND very continually promoting WCG.

2)I am bummed that, in laymen's terms, there are no results from all the computing power dedicated to these few WCG projects...especially the cancer ones. The updates from the MCM team every 6-12 months are deeply technical (that I cannot decipher) but still, in the end, have no results. No cures. No better medicines invented. No breakthroughs. No minor, helpful ways to battle cancer.

Despite my complaints, I am still here and still hold on for a miracle that someone at WCG will read my numerous complaints AND my suggestions for improvements and also ultimately I hope to read about some cancer breakthrough that can be credited back to WCG.

https://www.worldcommunitygrid.org/about_us/article.s?articleId=817

This is part of the problem...I, Joe End User, 1)should not have to go digging for project results, 2)should not have to read technical jargon that only chemical and data scientists can decipher, and 3)WCG SHOULD ACTIVELY BE TRACKING PROJECTS, both current and finished, for YEARS after the Projects end and publish laymen-friendly Project Results on the WCG website.

I do, however, find this lack of 1)jargon and 2)project tracking to be an industry-wide problem in the medical field. How many times have we read in some magazine or TED Talk or 60 Minutes show or other interview about how X is making huge headway in the area of Y...and then, poof, we never ever ever hear an update again? Seriously. I'm not talking about wishy washy 5 minute tv shows or 1 page article...I'm talking about detailed conversations and then there is no followup.

I've long stressed that mainstream scientific magazines should be obligated to do a 1-year, 3-year, 5-year, and 10-year followup on every single original story. Sure, it's work. But it keeps people interested and stops sloppy, sensationalism journalism.

On a different note, although I won't write my book yet on WCG's failures (and likely other DC projects), here are my thoughts on why the # of Donors just keeps on plummeting over the years and these thoughts HAVE NOT been listed in articles I've read about why DC is basically dead:

The projects are aimed at recruiting non-technical, Joe Public citizens to help. Yet Joe Public has many hurdles to actually (and continually) help as time goes on:

1)They replace their computer and forget to install WCG. Because it ran so nicely in the background on their old machine, they likely completely forget to install on the new machine.

2)They replace their computer and don't remember their account info or find it too complex to reset so they just quit.

3)They replace their computer and the darn Power Save features are set so aggressively that essentially they are returning 0-2 results a day (and they don't realize that). This is very true of computers (desktops and laptops) that have been shipped since 2015. They are ALL set to save every second of battery life (or your electric bill if it's a desktop) and they hibernate or sleep. I've set up hundreds of Wintel and Macs since 2015 and this drives me crazy, especially for desktops.

4)The lack of emails is a killer. There should be emails to donors if they haven't returned a result in 3 months (regardless if their Project has ended) prompting them to act. There should be monthly emails about WCG and all its projects with simple summaries AND links to whatever. When a Project is going to make a major pause or end, there should be proactive emails alerting donors and asking them to try something new. Email is king to general users who should be getting updates every month or so...it goes right in their face automatically. They are not going to make a habit to go to Twitter or any other Social Media platform every few weeks and find their WCG page and go looking for an update. They simply wake up in the morning, open their mail, and find a nice message from WCG.


These 4 points, in my view, are major underlying reasons (that have not been discussed in other articles I've read) why DC Projects start off well, but then nose-dive in participation after a year or 2.

If anyone at WCG or MCM is listening to my points, I'd love to hear their feedback.

Shouldn't this thread be in Suggestions/Feedback or Chat?