[email protected] wrote: > I did not write that. The person responding to my email wrote that.
Indeed so, for that bit, 'twas I! > I do not agree that we should either add or remove credits from those that > choose to run multiple projects. I don't agree with the "remove". I do agree with Paul's idea of *adding* "incentives" for favourable traits or for useful resources, whether physical or abstract. > Turn around time should be tracked by those projects that need to - so that > replacement work can go mostly to those clients with short turn times. That still needs support within the Boinc system. Or must such projects reinvent the wheel each time for themselves? > On Sep 28, 2009, at 8:34 AM, Martin wrote: > >> [email protected] wrote: ... something else. I wrote: >> Then perhaps we should include a resource of "number of projects" so >> that those people that do run multiple projects as is 'wished' are >> credited proportionately for whatever added value there might be that >> running multiple projects might have. >> >> >> Aside: I agree that running multiple projects is a 'good thing', but >> that is something that must be *persuasive* for the participants. >> Trying >> to dictate that by distortion of the software design is moving towards >> the route of coercion! Regards, Martin -- -------------------- Martin Lomas m_boincdev ml1 co uk.ddSPAM.dd -------------------- _______________________________________________ boinc_dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.ssl.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/boinc_dev To unsubscribe, visit the above URL and (near bottom of page) enter your email address.
