On Friday, March 10, 2006, 3:41:00 PM, Darin wrote:

DC> Totally agree.  I'd like to see some separation between rules created by
DC> newer rulebots and preexisting rules.  That way if there becomes an issue
DC> with a bot, we can turn off one group quickly and easily.

There is no way to do this without completely reorganizing the result
codes or defeating the competitive ranking mechanisms.

If you feel strongly about it I can move these rule groups to lower
numbers on your local rulebase or make some other numbering scheme -
but I don't recommend it. Moving these rule groups to lower numbers
would cause them to win competitions with other rules where they would
normally not win.

At some point in the future we might renumber the rule groups again,
but I like to avoid this since there are so many folks that just don't
get the message (no matter what we do to publish it) when we make
changes like this and so any large scale changes tend to cause
confusion for very long periods.

For example: I still, on occasion, have questions about the
gray-hosting group which has not existed for quite a long time.

So far there has not been one FP reported on bot F002 and extremely
few on F001 - the vast majority of those associated with the very
first group of listings prior to the last two upgrades for the bot.

_M



This E-Mail came from the Message Sniffer mailing list. For information and 
(un)subscription instructions go to 
http://www.sortmonster.com/MessageSniffer/Help/Help.html

Reply via email to