HardOCP Officially Supported Projects

HardOCP Support Project/s

  • Total voters
    138
  • Poll closed .
Status
Not open for further replies.
Maniacmous said:
Allow me to get this out of the way now - I am a F@H member for [H] (used to run UD for a different team before I went F@H though) - if you want to read bias into that, feel free.

I am supporting with my vote a move to just one team, at least officially. It is not out of hate for other projects or anything like that, but as a means to be more streamlined and more simply organized at the macro level. By officially, I mean have formal leadership for only one project, as Kyle said in another post, these forums will still be open for discussing any and all other projects and I wouldn't mind seeing people start [H] teams on any number of them. Mostly, I'm thinking one official team will help to streamline organization and focus the power of the [H] membership.

I truly am sorry that UD got shut down, I used to fold under that project for a different team, and I respect the science behind it and moreover totally respect all the members of the [H] team that put forth the same effort toward it as their F@H counterparts did. However, I see nobody being 'forced' to move in any direction. You are free to fold for whatever project(s) you support, and as I said before, would be really psyched to see [H]ard teams dominating many projects - I am only advocating F@H being the main project for the team. If you don't like F@H and don't want to dedicate your money, components, and effort to that cause, it is entirely up to you.

Basically, I just want to make clear that nobody is forcing you into anything, regardless of the decision of the whole on the matter. Moreover, I (and potentially others, though I can't speak for them) appreciate your contribution to UD, and I would hope that you would dedicate yourself to whatever cause(s) the team votes to support. You are free to do whatever you want with your components and money, as the loss of that project is not their fault. We fought and earned the #1 F@H spot with 2 teams, and we can maintain it with two teams in the future if that's what the people want. Please, don't assume that everyone that is backing F@H is against all other projects, because it really isn't that way at all.
Click to expand...

"but don't place the rage of UD getting shut down onto the F@H members of the team"

But it would be nice if we didn't have to rely on (strickly and only, not former UD'ers/F@H'ers) votes to decide the future of a second project either.
 
Freemason115 said:
I agree, but the general feeling I get from most of the posts is, were only wanting one sactioned team, and I think that is total BS. I mean really, who in the hell is it gonna hurt to run 2 teams? I'm speaking up now, because it seems everyone else wants to follow F@H like its the only thing out there. Yes I miss UD, but WCG is the closest that runs great on my equipment. If it comes down to F@H, I guess i'll take my toys elsewhere. I can hear it now....well we'll cya later, and thats not the response that should be coming across to former UD'ers. I mean my opinion carrys little wieght on these forums, I dont have a flashy HardDC'er beside my name. But at least all the UD'ers can say is we gave...
Click to expand...


That has been my point all through this last bit of crap. We have lost way too many folders and UDr's for no good reason at all other then misaligned loyalties.

Just plain dumb.:(
 
Freemason115 said:
"but don't place the rage of UD getting shut down onto the F@H members of the team"

But it would be nice if we didn't have to rely on F@H voters to decide the future of a second project either.
Click to expand...

If you look, I didn't vote for that very reason. It shouldn't even be an issue.
 
Freemason115 said:
Thanks, BillR finally someone sees where Im coming from.
Click to expand...

Trust me, you're not alone. The only reason I put my vote in the hat is because it's so off balance. I didn't want to vote because it's not my place to vote. However, I don't plan to stand idly by and let the team be torn apart because so many people want to make a decision against a second project. A decision that has no affect on them at all.

 
BTW Mason, I was a former UD'er. The point leader for the team in fact, and I did vote for diversity. Just wanted you to know, there were some of us from UD here, and one of us that even has the "DC'er of the Month" attached to him, jumping in and lending a voice to the debate. You are not alone. :D

 
BillR said:
That has been my point all through this last bit of crap. We have lost way too many folders and UDr's for no good reason at all other then misaligned loyalties.

Just plain dumb.:(
Click to expand...

This is why I voted for only one team - we leave wide open the option for people to fold under whatever project they want and stay here, even creating an [H] team under it if they want to, without the infighting between the projects.

I just want to see the tension end, the organization get nice and streamlined, the science get kicked into full gear, and see some work get done. I have nothing against running a second project, I just worry that we'll get tension between the two teams over recruiting and support or else have draconian rules in place to prevent it that'll kill the fun and friendly atmosphere we have had around here.

On a bit of a side note: Freemason, you seem like a solid guy, you really should hang about the forums more. /end side note
 
Anderu said:
BTW Mason, I was a former UD'er. The point leader for the team in fact, and I did vote for diversity. Just wanted you to know, there were some of us from UD here, and one of us that even has the "DC'er of the Month" attached to him, jumping in and lending a voice to the debate. You are not alone. :D

Click to expand...

Yeah I always looked at the top, and you were there, never reachable by any means of mine. But I think we did great work, and should be sanctioned to continue another project under the same banner as before. You and your folding power makes me wanna puke :D
 
Freemason115 said:
"but don't place the rage of UD getting shut down onto the F@H members of the team"

But it would be nice if we didn't have to rely on (strickly and only, not former UD'ers/F@H'ers) votes to decide the future of a second project either.
Click to expand...

The TEAM will decide the future of a second project.
 
Well it all seems like ranting now, it is upto the members to decide, then I/we will pickup the pieces and go from here.
 
Believe me when I say that a lot of that score had as much to do with how long I did UD, as much as the amount of machinery I had. In the end, there were only 16 computers going 24x7, and a couple that were on infrequently. It was the 6 years I did the project that drove the numbers up. :cool:
 
Maniacmous said:
This is why I voted for only one team - we leave wide open the option for people to fold under whatever project they want and stay here, even creating an [H] team under it if they want to, without the infighting between the projects.

I just want to see the tension end, the organization get nice and streamlined, the science get kicked into full gear, and see some work get done. I have nothing against running a second project, I just worry that we'll get tension between the two teams over recruiting and support or else have draconian rules in place to prevent it that'll kill the fun and friendly atmosphere we have had around here.

On a bit of a side note: Freemason, you seem like a solid guy, you really should hang about the forums more. /end side note
Click to expand...

you do know the UD team has been around for quite sometime?? so having a new project to replace UD will do what now???? remember...most of this infighting was really about what project to take on without comparisions of each.

Side note....too bad all the UD'ers come out once its over :(
 
"On a bit of a side note: Freemason, you seem like a solid guy, you really should hang about the forums more. /end side note"

Thanks for the invitation, but I'm usually a quite person, and don't care for stick my nose in others threads about things that don't involve me. I have nothing really to contribute but my 5 boxes. As I said before, why try to battle wits with people who are more well versed in such things, when you can lurk like me and try to soak it up.
 
Maniacmous said:
we leave wide open the option for people to fold under whatever project they want and stay here, even creating an [H] team under it if they want to, without the infighting between the projects.
Click to expand...

Incorrect. Only teams sanctioned by HardOCP (Kyle) can do anything. It's not our choice to start doing DC under any project using the HardOCP name.

Choosing one team closes the door to anyone that wants to fold for the [H]orde but doesn't want to do F@H.

And why would there be any infighting? The only way there would be infighting is if someone created a problem that doesn't exist. Things happened a long time ago and that's how there became two projects. This was done to keep the team together.

Why are so many people scared of having a second project?

The only reasons I have seen so far for positives for one team are streamlining (could someone please elaborate on this as it seems a bit vague and is being used as a buzzword only) and easing of tensions. Tensions aren't caused by projects, their caused by people. The only way I see tensions being eased by going to one project is because so many people leave to go off on their own or join a different team. That's completely against what this team is supposed to stand for.

Myself and others have given a lot of positive and concrete reasons for a second project. These reasons far outweigh even the abstract reasons given for having only one project.

It's interesting that people have brought up "the science". How do you quantify the value of the science to say F@H science is more valuable than another project's science that meets the [H]orde's stringent standards? I don't know of any way anyone has come up with which can quantify the science.

 
Freemason115 said:
"On a bit of a side note: Freemason, you seem like a solid guy, you really should hang about the forums more. /end side note"

Thanks for the invitation, but I'm usually a quite person, and don't care for stick my nose in others threads about things that don't involve me. I have nothing really to contribute but my 5 boxes. As I said before, why try to battle wits with people who are more well versed in such things, when you can lurk like me and try to soak it up.
Click to expand...

Ah, but knowledge about projects, hardware and the best way to use them is not everything there is in here. You have the ability to make your points and explain them clearly. You have no reason to stand back unless you just have nothing to say and it's obvious you do. Everyone here has an opinion. I think if more people voiced their opinions on a regular basis, we would not be having any problems now.

I'm not trying to lay blame on anyone. I know some of the reasons some people don't speak up in here. Only a tiny fraction of the people folding for the [H]orde actually post in here at all. There are well over a thousand people doing F@H actively for the [H]orde and I'm not sure what the numbers of active for UD were. But the vast majority of all of them don't post in here. If they did, this would be the busiest subforum here. It just happens to be that the most active posters are F@H members.

Just because someone does not post here or post on a regular basis, it does not mean they are not part of the [H]orde. I started folding for the [H]orde before I even joined the forums. I would bet we have plenty of people out there folding with us that don't have forum accounts.

 
I dunno about there only being teams officially sanctioned by Kyle - to my knowledge, there are teams on other projects that are not officially sanctioned - SETI and Einstein@Home come to mind here.

I don't know that anyone is scared of a second project, I know some no doubt want to pile on the F@H bandwagon as strong as we can, and while I respect that ideal, its not why I want to go about it. Streamlining, as I see it, is simplifying everything with how the site relates to the project(s). If you have one team officially sanctioned, there are no questions about fairness in forum recruiting, equal front page pimpage, etc. - it makes organization much easier if only because you have half as much to deal with (with one team rather than 2) at any given time.

I believe there is great value in many projects, and personally, as long as it falls under the same standards as UD and F@H have (public dissemination of results, etc) - I'm all for the science in any of its forms - there is power to be had here, no matter how one chooses to use theirs. It is just my belief that right now, it will be much easier to establish one program, create rules, fine tune it, and then later to fold one or more projects in under the [H]orde flag. I just think it would make the restructuring easier for now, but those are my personal thoughts on the matter.

I don't want anyone to run off or feel forced out of the [H]ome if we move to one team, I just want this to go as smoothly as possible, if that means 2 teams, great, I'm all for it, though my instinct says creating a new organizational structure will be easier dealing with only one at a time rather than 2 simultaneously, hence my vote for one team (as I said, not necessarily a permanent move - just until we get settled).
 
Maniacmous said:
Streamlining, as I see it, is simplifying everything with how the site relates to the project(s). If you have one team officially sanctioned, there are no questions about fairness in forum recruiting, equal front page pimpage, etc. - it makes organization much easier if only because you have half as much to deal with (with one team rather than 2) at any given time.
Click to expand...

Why do people keep bringing this up??? There hasnt been this problem since i have been here....everytime i see front page pimping (unless is something special like GPU folding) both teams are mentioned as possible projects. same with recruiting...we have had recruiting drives for both UD and F@H. True, F@H is the more popular one usually, but fairness in advertising them both has always been there. Only thing i can think of is contest that isolate to one team or another, and UD was usually the isolated one cuz we could never get enough members to be active enough to play. and this whole streamlining is bs....how much of a well oiled machine can our F@H team be??? after all, we are the top dogs in it.
 
I voted for F@H only. At this point, I think we need to re-group and focus on getting the group organized first. Let's hold off deciding about new projects until the smoke clears.



 
JBavousett said:
I voted for F@H only. At this point, I think we need to re-group and focus on getting the group organized first. Let's hold off deciding about new projects until the smoke clears.



[/QAnd

Once everyone who chooses not to run F@H has left, there won't be any additional need for discussion about the topic anymore. I say to hell with the smoke clearing, now is the time for action.


Click to expand...
 
Anderu said:
When you cast your vote, try to keep in mind what you think the direction for the team should be, rather than your personal preference. They can be different things.

I have seen some folks say that they cast a vote for a single project because they did not have the time, equipment or desire to support another project. But if you don't object to the team in general doing so, then you could still cast a vote for multiple projects.

I am not trying to tell anyone how to vote, just trying to point out one reason why one would not necessarily have to vote for a single project scenario, even if they themselves could only support one.
Click to expand...

Indeed. And this comes to the heart of an issue I haven't been able to understand yet throughout many posts. It is to me at least the equivilent of telling someone else what they can do. I have yet to see how a 2nd team affects someone who isn't going to participate in it, yet they vote against it and speak against it.

If you have 10 or 2 or 1 or 50 pc's and only plan to contribute to 1 project then do so. But why take part in a vote to stop others from doing so? And really, if you have no intention of being in a 2nd project anyway and vote against it in an election deciding the possiblity of doing it, then all you are doing is stopping others from doing something you have no intention of doing.

Personally I try to distance myself from groups that have this mentality. I guess I choose wrong here. :(

If this vote really makes the decision then there will be no 2nd team it seems. I voted for a 2nd one and if the option was there I'd have voted for 3 or 10 more.

I have started looking for another team for my non FaH boxes already as it seems quite apparent the direction this is going.
 
Reading back over all these posts I realize something, this is like high school with F@H being the in-crowd, and "other Projects" being the shunned or outcasts. I'm done fighting, good luck with your future projects.


 
I haven't voted yet, because I'm not sure which way to vote.... I ran UD a few times here and there in the past... I also ran Seti back before I came to the [H]... The problem I'm having is that I don't want to push people away because we don't create a 2nd official team, but I also don't want there to be the semi-unspoken rift between the individuals on this team because we do have a 2nd project....

Whether or not there are 2 "Official" projects or not, the fact that we are a team.... We're the [H]orde, and up until last weekend, that included F@H and UD and whatever Unofficial teams/individuals were out there.... I don't think any F@Her is better than a UDer or anyone else... We all have the same goal (albeit for different reasons) and we're here to reach that goal...

I'm sure that we'll lose people because UD is gone, or because they don't agree with whatever decision is made... But we're still a strong team and we will kick ass in whatever project(s) we decide on.

I'm not against having a second "Official" project, but I am against the bickering and infighting... I understand that we're all humans, and we'll have differences in opinion and will lock horns once in awhile... It's life.... But the fact remains that as long as you're Folding/Crunching/UDing/etc/etc/etc you're on the same side of the battle as the rest of us...


Keep on Folding!! For the [H]orde!!

 
charpman said:
Indeed. And this comes to the heart of an issue I haven't been able to understand yet throughout many posts. It is to me at least the equivalent of telling someone else what they can do. I have yet to see how a 2nd team affects someone who isn't going to participate in it, yet they vote against it and speak against it.
Click to expand...
I do not understand that mentality either, but I guess the people that voted in that direction surely have some reason for their decision.
 
SmokeRngs said:
Incorrect. Only teams sanctioned by HardOCP (Kyle) can do anything. It's not our choice to start doing DC under any project using the HardOCP name.
Click to expand...
Actually, you are incorrect. Kyle has said that many projects can exist here, but [H]ardOCP will only officially support 1 or 2. In my mind, that means that you are free to run whatever you wish, but don't expect front page news for Seti@home.
Choosing one team closes the door to anyone that wants to fold for the [H]orde but doesn't want to do F@H.
Click to expand...
I am not sure why some feel this way...don't feel that this is directed towards you, Smoke because it's not, I just happened to quote you.

No one will/should be asked to leave this team/forum. Send your cycles wherever you want. But again, Kyle will only throw his resources behind a couple projects at most.

This is what I got out of this anyway.
 
Actually, you are incorrect. Kyle has said that many projects can exist here, but [H]ardOCP will only officially support 1 or 2. In my mind, that means that you are free to run whatever you wish, but don't expect front page news for Seti@home.
Click to expand...

This what happened when we ran FAD (Find A Drug). Some people wanted to run it (I was one), but at the time we were in a fight to hold on to the top spots in G@H and F@H and we were behind in UD.

So no official team support was given to FAD, but the team did not try to stop anyone one from running it. It's your boxes, it's your choice what to do with them!



 
DF454 said:
This what happened when we ran FAD (Find A Drug). Some people wanted to run it (I was one), but at the time we were in a fight to hold on to the top spots in G@H and F@H and we were behind in UD.

So no official team support was given to FAD, but the team did not try to stop anyone one from running it. It's your boxes, it's your choice what to do with them!
Click to expand...
Exactly. If you remember, DF454, I ran FAD as well and loved it!
 
I remember Moose :) I've been lurking around here a long time :eek:
 
This thread is really disheartening… all these projects are supposed to be about the greater good... the science, and helping people...

Not arguing with each other about where our resources should go...

I understand that their has to be a decision about "officially" sponsored projects, but that doesn’t mean that we have to hate each other or have an "us" vs. "them" attitude towards either project...

That’s just my $0.02

I wont be commenting in this forum until this all blows over, I am really disappointed in what I have read here the last few days
 
I don't post in this forum often, largely because I'm busy with other stuff.That said, I fold for my step-sister, who has beaten off leukemia and is on the road to a 'normal' life. I've stayed with this team as long as I have because (1) I'm a creature of habit and (2) I have historically liked the way that people conduct themselves here.

If I were joining a team now, I'd go with OCAU - they're all friendly and helpful, and not perpetually fighting. All Distributed projects that are being talked about are positive - they all deserve to be supported, though only a limited number can be officially condoned/supported by Kyle. Rather than complaining to each other about the various projects, we should just weight the merits, vote, and continue on. Just because a proposed project isn't accepted doesn't mean that members can't work on non-sanctioned projects, just that it doesn't receive the full support from [H] - is it the support you want (and being in the top team) or assisting a project that you feel is worthy of your time, electricity, and cycles?

 
Freemason115 said:
Once everyone who chooses not to run F@H has left, there won't be any additional need for discussion about the topic anymore. I say to hell with the smoke clearing, now is the time for action.
Click to expand...

Exactly. This is all choosing one project does in my opinion as well. A second project doesn't stop people from doing F@H.

I also have to echo the posts of the few who said "What if F@H goes down?" UD seemed to end rather suddenly. It would be a shame if the same thing happened to F@H and then there was nothing.
 
MrMike said:
Exactly. This is all choosing one project does in my opinion as well. A second project doesn't stop people from doing F@H.

I also have to echo the posts of the few who said "What if F@H goes down?" UD seemed to end rather suddenly. It would be a shame if the same thing happened to F@H and then there was nothing.
Click to expand...

In F@H's defense, it seems FAR more stable than UD was. UD had a bunch of promises, but never really updated their client or anything, they didn't even support SMP in any way.

F@H has real SMP support (and you could fake it with multiple instances before), not to mention all the work they did on GPU and PS3 folding. I really don't think F@H closing should be a concern at this point.
 
Viper87227 said:
really don't think F@H closing should be a concern at this point.
Click to expand...

I spoke with Mike Houston in person last week from Stanford, the guy that contributed heavily to the Folding project and is still very much engrained in it, and from his communications, I don't see Folding@Home going away in the conceivable future......at least until they can build GPU farms that can run it faster than we can do on our boxes. And that is a long way off.
 
I voted for WCG. I also think the one issue I see with this poll is simple - you need to combine the WCG + R@H votes together to equal what the general preference is, and if the WCG + R@H have more votes, choose the one that had the most.
If there are 100 votes, F@H only has 45 votes, WCG has 37 and R@H has 18, there are more people voting to have a second project, however they are split between two votes - which is unfair. I think the final vote needs to be F@H vs the other two combined, and then whichever of the other two gets more votes will get the support. That's just how I see it.
 
FighterAce124 said:
I voted for WCG. I also think the one issue I see with this poll is simple - you need to combine the WCG + R@H votes together to equal what the general preference is, and if the WCG + R@H have more votes, choose the one that had the most.
If there are 100 votes, F@H only has 45 votes, WCG has 37 and R@H has 18, there are more people voting to have a second project, however they are split between two votes - which is unfair. I think the final vote needs to be F@H vs the other two combined, and then whichever of the other two gets more votes will get the support. That's just how I see it.
Click to expand...


I respect that argument as it does have some merit. Still, F@H Only is still ahead with over 50% of the vote.

Let's keep this in mind too. The basic direction of the team is being set up now. Once we get an infrastructure in place to make team decisions there is always room for change.
 
I voted WCG. The project looked very organized and professional, and it's something that I could see myself installing, and they have a website that I'd be open to sending other people to.

edit: Of course I'll still continue to run F@H. It's just that if I have issues for whatever reason, i'd install WCG. Also it looks like WCG is something that would be easy to help people out with, and already has a large install base.

 
I voted for Folding @ Home.

That is not to say that the other initiatives are less worthy, f@[H] has a special place in my heart, my mom passed away a few years ago from Alzheimer's - it was not pretty, it was not fast, and it was way too early.

I've been folding for [H] for a while and I while my output isn't the largest, I feel any output helps. I am sorry if this seems selfish to me, and I am not saying "Only use your cycles for my pet project" Please load all the projects you like, but I would like to continue to see [H] as the prime folding team - actually I'd like to see us and OCAU trading off more as that was great for both teams.

Remember this is a great discussion to have - it's about determining HOW we are going to help - we've gotten past the "are we going to help?" bit with flying colors. We all want to do something good for someone else and for some at a significant expense, asking nothing in return - that is a wonderful circumstance to have a discussion.

Regardless of the outcome: Well done [H]
 
It would be nice to see King_N post something on hardfolding.com to draw in the people who go there, but not the forums that often.

There are no news updates that show anything about UD shutting down, the vote for a new project, nor the team leaders.

It would be nice to see *something* from someone who was so outspoken about these issues a few days ago to take part.
 
Starting another project would get my comnpetative juices flowing as their is no challange now. Remember how we fought back and forth for the title and now their is no challange and its boring not being challanged.

 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top