On Mon, Jun 14, 1999 at 11:21:58AM -0500, Mikus Grinbergs wrote:
I guess I'm fighting a losing battle here. My thoughts:
I don't consider myself fighting, BTW.
- If George or Scott decide that for the GIMPS project to continue to
be viable, anyone who participates MUST be able to reply
Am I just wrong in thinking this?
I fully agree with your opinions above[1], but you are wrong when you
make your own rules based on these opinions, and try to force other
people to follow your rules and not the commonly accepted ones. I don't
want to play with people who don't follow the
On Sun, Jun 13, 1999 at 11:26:56PM -0600, Aaron Blosser [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
But hey, this is just my opinion. After I test this little teeny tiny group
of numbers, I won't poach anymore and you can all do whatever, but I still
think it's a good idea to "clean house" every now and then.
---Aaron Blosser [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
How about another option Aaron? You touch anyone's
exponents...especially mine and I report you to the FBI for
stealing?
DAMNITI sure as hell hope the above message was in jest. You
better not play around with my exponents (or anyone
First of all, no, none of those exponents are mine. I have tons of
machines running Prime95 and I'm pretty high up on the list of
producers It's just that I think you're way off base on this...and I'm
sure other people on this list think the same too. whine, complain,
etc. George, (or
ld probably just give that person the full credit
and not want any credit at all really. So if its your "Place in history" you
are worried about, I don't really care.
-Original Message-
From: Ashton Vaz [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Sunday, June 13, 1999 8:55 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTE
"Aaron" == Aaron Blosser [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote the following on Sun, 13 Jun 1999 22:16:28 -0600
Aaron Certain tools are better suited to certain jobs. Find the
Aaron job that your slower computer is best suited for and go for
Aaron it.
I think this argument also applies to your
At 07:40 AM 6/14/99 -0600, you wrote:
Sheesh, well it has been a rough past week... :-) Call it "testing the
waters". I'm good at that. To my knowledge, the issue of poaching numbers
has never been discussed (on the list anyway), so at least we got to talk
about it. We now know that some
Aaron Certain tools are better suited to certain jobs. Find the
Aaron job that your slower computer is best suited for and go for
Aaron it.
I think this argument also applies to your computers...why not put
your faster computers on the bigger exponents where they are needed,
instead
Yvan Dutil [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
One weird bahavior: 5292757. Which as appear to have been resetted
recently by its 'owner' to an duration as long as the initial one!
Obviously, someone got dinged with the v17-v18 upgrade. I pity them...
On Mon, 14 Jun 1999, Steinar H. Gunderson wrote:
I thought that if no check-in was done in 60 days, the number was put back in
the pool.
No, if no check-in has been done in 60 days _after the exponent was expected
to complete_, it is put back into the pool. Of course, once in a while,
the
We could wait around 2 years to finally get around to testing this
obviously
abandoned one, or I'll just do it now.
How about another option Aaron? You touch anyone's
exponents...especially mine and I report you to the FBI for stealing?
DAMNITI sure as hell hope the above message
This is supposed to be fun, and your behaviour makes it the oposite. I
don't want to stand guard over my exponents, sending in false progress
reports to make you stay away from them.
Hey, whoa. I'm not asking anyone to send in false status reports. I *real*
status report every now and then
13 matches
Mail list logo
