I second the motion. The info on what would be most useful for us to do and report, and when, is currently spread around several threads, and mixed in with a lot of techie chatter. Only those who read most every thread (and whose eyes don't glaze over when things get technical) are currently up to speed, and even then it's not always clear *exactly* what should be done or reported precisely when.

A clear, concise, and non-technical (as possible) summary would be very useful, and would give the advisors a post to point at as questions recur.

I third halfcard's suggestion.

The current mess over rates the average member's ability and desire to search through mutiple threads, translate all the tech talk (what the heck is converging?) and arrive at a formula for what to do.

Didactylos's solution seriously under rates the average member's ability to follow a simple set of instructions posted in an easy to find location (yes, we need stickys). It perpetuates the mess that we see now. Members would much rather have something clear and simple. They really do not want to have to get bogged down in stating their problem, responding to questions, sorting through all the follow up posts which may or may not be nonsense, etc.

Halfcard's suggestion is an excellent idea to simplify things for members. There seems to be a lot of resistance to simplicity and the direct approach at WCG.

Yep. It's the lack of stickys. That's the rub. Halfcard's excellent suggestion is hard to implement without stickys.

Does mvnForum allow stickys? If not then that puts the matter to rest. If it does allow stickys then I strongly encourage WCG to enable them as soon as possible.

mvnForum is the software that these forums run on. I just got back from the mvnForum website. Read this thread from the forums there.

The latest version of mvnForum as opposed to the version WCG uses which is 2 years out of date has stickys as well as announcements, both very cool features.

OK crunchers, let's tell them. Cut and paste the 4 lines below into your post. Then change all the { to [. Then click Preview to see if you got it right. The lines will appear big and red like they do below unless you mised one of the {.

{size=3]{color=crimson]{b]
We are the crunchers and we want stickys!
No sticky, no crunchy!
{/b]{/color]{/size]



We are the crunchers and we want stickys!
No sticky, no crunchy!

Hi halfcard,
For my part, my lack of response is due more to ignorance than to lack of interest. If the graphs are not moving in the Application View of the UD client, then kill it. That comes from Rick Alther. But if they are or if you are using BOINC, how long is it reasonable to wait until deciding that lack of progress in HPF2 requires termination? (I am always happy with 24 hours, but on a fast computer I am happy with shorter times.) Is 0% progress a special case, or does the general rule apply? Is there a reasonable rule of thumb that takes the speed of the CPU into account?

I am just trying to help people with an ad hoc response. I don't respect any general rules that I make up from ignorance and very little real experience. Which makes me reluctant to start posting 'The Rules'.

Just trying to explain my position.
Lawrence