I would probably agree that. Something tells me that Team 100M is going to be our arch-nemesis...Originally Posted by zombie67
I would probably agree that. Something tells me that Team 100M is going to be our arch-nemesis...
Last time I checked, there is no value difference between the different MMs.I would probably agree that. Something tells me that Team 100M is going to be our arch-nemesis...
In fast, the bigger MMs are easier to get, in a way. One can always assign more resources to get them. But the smaller are harder, or even impossible, if the project(s) is dead. No way to may up ground.
Aqua flows over 1 BILLION!! We are in sole procession of #1 on this Team MM plateau. SG and 2ch are tied for 2nd with LAF wallowing in 4th place.
Three Team MM's in three days. I'll see if I can make it 4 in 4 days with CAS@Home.
Remember two things at least. These Team MM's are only marginally important compared to or relative to being #1 in total credits and RAC. The other thing is the goal of this project was to improve the Team MM positions a bit for appearance and any bragging rights (and to be a thorn in other team's sides) but more importantly not let a MM be needlessly missed for lack of a little attention to a stalled or neglected project (No more GeneticLife's).
Once all goals in this post are met the next installment of this team MM project will have to involve longer term efforts from other team members to improve our Team MM positions.
Update: CAS@Home is over 1 million so it was four Team MM in four consecutive days. The vacuum created by this flurry of activity apparently sucked AlmereGrid into the 1 million credit column today also. Nice work team.
I'll see if I can do something that shows the changes over the last 2-3 months from this focus.
Look to the Team Top Ten MM post in this same forum to see if you can help with beefing up another Team MM category. If that's what floats your boat.
I'll give you my take on this..
Yes, other people on other teams are interested in the MM's. I've had quite a few emails/PM's etc from a diversity of teams. Everyone tends to be different and to each their own as to particular goals, whatever makes it fun is what you should do IMO. A number of times over the years my interest has started to wane for differing reasons, but then I look for a new challenge.
That's how the MM's came about. I've got a passion for statistics I guess and I enjoy working with databases. Calculating the MM's is just another way of analyzing the data I collect. Milestones in particular fascinate me, especially the trend analysis of them.
My recent work has been to record the (1st to xxxxxx) milestones. Might badgify (tm) these.. Just a pity I don't have milestone data prior to April 2008.
OK, thanks to all who responded there. Like I said, wasn't in my mind to start a ruckus - it is no secret what I personally, would like to see for this team's future - this was just to bounce some ideas around.
I personally like to crunch for max credits, and then it's cool to see the MMs come - like hitting 10Mil in something or 50Mil or whatever...that's really cool to see it measured like that!I like the progress factor.
I wearing two hats here, though. For the next 12 months (if ya'll let me finish out my term, I have to try to figure out how to grow this team; where to put my effort until the next admin is chosen. Obviously, becoming a farmer and cranking out as many credits as I can while my name's in red here, well, that's part one of strategy. If folks can see I'm putting some blood and sweat and tears into this, then maybe, just maybe it will help unify for the cause a little.
The next part of the strategy is trying to get other (primarily USA based) teams to help / merge with us to present a larger USA front to the International BOINC community on challenges, and score boards etc. We're working on it, but have met with serious resistance (not like it wasn't expected, but you still have to put the effort out.)
Third phase, which I'm still mulling over and haven't even started yet, is the marketing campaign.
To quote zombie "you think "total team credits" are important, right? Why? Because you think so? Or because you think others think so? Or...?"
OK, here's the honest truth. If I didn't think other crunchers out there, or any new, or future crunchers "cared" about who was on top, that "#1 Overall World Wide" position would hold little appeal. I would honestly crunch things like Einstein because I like what they're doing.
However, let's be honest with each other. People are superficial. Waaaaay too superficial, let me tell you. In my business I run in to that constantly.
I know that people, once they get "hooked" on crunching, or even just start out of curiosity, well, many don't even join a team. They don't know much about it. The ones that do join a team, join either because of friendship - pull - or they join a "big team". Why? Because folks just want to be winners. It's psychology. You can't reason that out of people. MUCH MORE of our decisions are based on emotion than fact. Maxwell, of all people, can tell you more about this than anyone due to his education.
Therefore, it is imperative that we climb as high in the World Wide Rankings as possible; to strive to attain that #1 overall mark as a goal. It doesn't so much matter that we are #1 today, as the knowledge that we are striving for, and will get there someday. That is the attitude that makes a difference. That is the desire, the "burning" that will bring big crunchers, little crunchers, dedicated crunchers - all of them - to our team.
However, and this is where my question comes in: Are there crunchers out there who are saying, "hmmm...what team has the most 100K's? I'd like to join that one." Or another who says, "hmmm....what team has the most 10Mil's? I have a lot of those, so I'd like to go there."
IF - and it's a BIG IF - there are crunchers new and old, out there who are looking at the stats that way, then our "marketing" pitch and attitude should be to provide a nice place for some of them.
That is why I'm asking the question. How many of those folks are out there? Are they a large %? Even if they are a small % of the total, do they have a large % of the firepower (like Paul L, and Zombie, etc.)
Those are some questions that might make MM's more meaningful to those of us trying to grow the team. My "discussion" has nothing to do with whether or not "#1 Overall" or "MM's" are a "better" way of determining a team's strength or progress. It is literally to each their own - there is, and never will be - cross project parity.
It is simply a matter of deciding together how much weight we should throw into MM's as a team - because they can easily be a personal goal - but we're talking about a team goal here...one of growing, thriving, and being the happiest, most satisfied, best working BOINC team in the world.
Last edited by DrPop; 05-10-11 at 03:22 PM.
Well, DrPop, how about this as a take on your thought process. If having your name at the top of the BOINC overall list seems important, wouldn't it also be great to see your name at the top of most every list a potential recruit might run into? If you start meandering through all these neat little stats pages, and spot that TeamA is in the Top5 in, like, Everything, and happens to align with your interests/nationality/etc, that may sway a Team decision as well. Similar to seeing it mentioned predominantly in all the various Project forums in their Team Recruitment threads...
As Maxwell and Zombie67 mentioned, it really comes down to what catches your eye at the time you're looking around at this stuff.
It certainly is hard to find a list of stats that we aren't somewhere near the top in. But it also irks me that SG and Laf are 1 and 2 overall. I'm fairly certain we have more high end, high production equipment than they do. We just need to figure out the best way to deploy it to keep the MM's rolling AND make it to the top at the same time.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
