Xilikon
[H]ard|DCer of the Year 2008
- Joined
- Oct 12, 2004
- Messages
- 15,010
Now that I got the DAB member position after Tobit decided to retire from the DAB and after discussing with Vijay about what must be done to create the DAB, I'm making this thread to explain what is the exact purpose of the DAB and to answer any questions. Please don't turn this in a nice woodlog where we flame each other like a bunch of drama queen bitches (blame Marty9876 for that )...
First of all, what is a Donors Advisory Board ? It's a board grouping the Pande Group, Bruce (representing the smaller teams without representative) and the representative of the top 5 teams. The DAB doesn't take decisions and doesn't vote on proposal so forget it if you expect it to override the PG choices. However, the representatives can discuss about the various "hot" topics of today and tomorrow with the PG to find a good way to resolve at the satisfaction of the general folding crowd. When a solution is agreed between the PG and the DAB, Vijay will then do the necessary to implement the solution if the solution is beneficial for the whole project form the participation and the science view. The DAB will also participate by explaining the decisions to their respective teams and to answer questions/concerns (sometime, we can use that to polish a solution which is agreed in the DAB and to remove any potential issue).
Let's use the example of the benchmarking issue which is a longtime hot topic : The PG always use a reference machine to determine the value of each workunit but that will bring out lots of flaws when we see the same workunit getting a big ppd swing among a broader range of hardware even if the hardware is very close to the reference benchmark machine. The DAB could propose to collaborate in the validation of the points value by running the same units on a few differents machines then propose a better points value which reduce the discrepancy and represent the value better. Remeber this is a example and the solution might not be that but that's the goal of the DAB to find out with the PG what is the best solution which can satisfy the PG (science production output) and the general folding crowd (points output) at the same time.
I know some people ask what is the level of the DAB in the folding world. For me, the DAB is a "political" board who use diplomacy to find the best solutions because there is no perfect solution and we must satisfy the needs of the folders while satisfying the needs of the PG at the same time even with a opposed view on the project. It's not a easy task to find the best compromise and to explain it to everyone so it take a good levelheaded set of people to be able to do this. However, the DAB will have a lot of weight when we need to make decisions that the PG cannot ignore. The PG will benefit from that weight in the sense they can get more connected to the needs of folders instead of being accused of ignoring them.
I hope this will help clarify the goals of the DAB and if you have legitimate questions, feel free to ask and I'll answer to the best of my knowledge. If I'm unsure, I will check with Vijay and others DAB members to provide a correct and honest answer.
First of all, what is a Donors Advisory Board ? It's a board grouping the Pande Group, Bruce (representing the smaller teams without representative) and the representative of the top 5 teams. The DAB doesn't take decisions and doesn't vote on proposal so forget it if you expect it to override the PG choices. However, the representatives can discuss about the various "hot" topics of today and tomorrow with the PG to find a good way to resolve at the satisfaction of the general folding crowd. When a solution is agreed between the PG and the DAB, Vijay will then do the necessary to implement the solution if the solution is beneficial for the whole project form the participation and the science view. The DAB will also participate by explaining the decisions to their respective teams and to answer questions/concerns (sometime, we can use that to polish a solution which is agreed in the DAB and to remove any potential issue).
Let's use the example of the benchmarking issue which is a longtime hot topic : The PG always use a reference machine to determine the value of each workunit but that will bring out lots of flaws when we see the same workunit getting a big ppd swing among a broader range of hardware even if the hardware is very close to the reference benchmark machine. The DAB could propose to collaborate in the validation of the points value by running the same units on a few differents machines then propose a better points value which reduce the discrepancy and represent the value better. Remeber this is a example and the solution might not be that but that's the goal of the DAB to find out with the PG what is the best solution which can satisfy the PG (science production output) and the general folding crowd (points output) at the same time.
I know some people ask what is the level of the DAB in the folding world. For me, the DAB is a "political" board who use diplomacy to find the best solutions because there is no perfect solution and we must satisfy the needs of the folders while satisfying the needs of the PG at the same time even with a opposed view on the project. It's not a easy task to find the best compromise and to explain it to everyone so it take a good levelheaded set of people to be able to do this. However, the DAB will have a lot of weight when we need to make decisions that the PG cannot ignore. The PG will benefit from that weight in the sense they can get more connected to the needs of folders instead of being accused of ignoring them.
I hope this will help clarify the goals of the DAB and if you have legitimate questions, feel free to ask and I'll answer to the best of my knowledge. If I'm unsure, I will check with Vijay and others DAB members to provide a correct and honest answer.