host and multiple instances will be banished from WUProp.

It's even worse than before. What if I want to run one "main" instance with CPU apps and a bunch of GCC-only instances (for credits and their badges), and you are going to ban legit main instance too?

If you exceed number of core, don't run WUProp on all GCC-only instances and everything will be OK.

On a single-core Raspberry Pi B+ is it very easy to exceed the number of cores. But I do not run GCC on it, at the advice of QCN I run only QCN. I try to get my Raspberry Sense Hat communicating with the QCN projects -any of the now five active ones will do, so I run QCN, QCN continual, QCN Taiwan, QCN Taiwan Continual and QCN continual EMSC / SCEM. They all have a different project url.

---

I hold Sebastien responsible for my demise and demand that he apologize for I have not abused the system and I am not a cheat. I have every right to defend myself for I have used a legitimate tool at my disposal that is available to all therefore it can't be called cheating or abuse.

I can only shake my head at this.

All tasks are validating but I am getting zero hours for any CPU work. 4 core tablet has half the hours in past day as my 32 thread machine. I have not exceeded clients > cores since the admin has made that announcement yet I have had 0 hours for ALL CPU work. All of it.

Even tablets which have always had 1 client are getting zero hours. NCI, CPU, anything.

All tasks are validating but I am getting zero hours for any CPU work. 4 core tablet has half the hours in past day as my 32 thread machine. I have not exceeded clients > cores since the admin has made that announcement yet I have had 0 hours for ALL CPU work. All of it.

Even tablets which have always had 1 client are getting zero hours. NCI, CPU, anything.

It's not just you, going by the server_status page the server is having problems. Looks like there are over 10k wu's waiting to be analysed...

---

All tasks are validating but I am getting zero hours for any CPU work. 4 core tablet has half the hours in past day as my 32 thread machine. I have not exceeded clients > cores since the admin has made that announcement yet I have had 0 hours for ALL CPU work. All of it.

Even tablets which have always had 1 client are getting zero hours. NCI, CPU, anything.

It's not just you, going by the server_status page the server is having problems. Looks like there are over 10k wu's waiting to be analysed...

Hmm I see. The timing put it right at the admin's last post about the latest rule update so it looked like had been banned.

I hold Sebastien responsible for my demise and demand that he apologize for I have not abused the system and I am not a cheat. I have every right to defend myself for I have used a legitimate tool at my disposal that is available to all therefore it can't be called cheating or abuse.

I can only shake my head at this.

I do not believe this. Why can't I defend myself for I have done nothing wrong yet I am told that I am abusing the system and inferring that I am a cheat. The Admin on GridComputing Center has stated that he is 99.9 percent happy with people using Multiple Clients. If I follow their policy, I will not get credit for it here. Please tell me where can I read up on the use of Multiple Clients where it states that we will abuse the system by its use. Surely, it is up to individual project to accept or reject its use. To tell me that I am a cheat by using it is not acceptable to me. You BOK all all people should realize that in your own Team where you are called Ambassador its use is openly encouraged and I have no doubt that those in that team with High credits have used it. I am sure you would not accept it if you were told that they are all cheats and abused the system.

I think it is about time we stopped and closed this thread. Let us accept that there are people who are sensitive and do not like a project or its manager who haphazardly creates rules to suit himself at the expense of innocent users. By creating rules contrary to projects policies that he supports and threatens all users that unless the cheating stops in two weeks time a couple of projects will be deleted from his project. Why do innocent users should suffer. Why is the policy changed in the middle of the game and not earlier. Surely it was obvious that some users accumulated a massive number of hours months ago. Now I have no chance to ever catch up to them.

At least I am happy that I still have a choice to support WUprop or disconnect from it. I chose the later.

---

I hold Sebastien responsible for my demise and demand that he apologize for I have not abused the system and I am not a cheat. I have every right to defend myself for I have used a legitimate tool at my disposal that is available to all therefore it can't be called cheating or abuse.

I can only shake my head at this.

For a bit of fun. @ Bok. Since I am not sure what is your country of origin and I can not see you shaking your head, one could assume that you are in complete agreement with me. According to the Dictionary, in particular the last paragraph:

to shake one's head (third-person singular simple present shakes one's head, present participle shaking one's head, simple past shook one's head, past participle shaken one's head)
To move one's head from side to side, in a repeated swiveling motion from the neck, to indicate disagreement, negation, disbelief, disapproval or dismay.  [quotations ▼]
(less common) To move one's head up and down, in a repeated hinge-like motion from the top of the spine, to indicate agreement, affirmation, approval, or simply polite attentiveness.  [quotations ▼]
Usage notes[edit]
A relatively quick head movement from side to side indicates an emphatic "no," while a slower motion tends to indicate disbelief or dismay.
A relatively quick head movement up and down indicates an emphatic "yes," while a slower motion tends to indicate attentiveness.
In some countries, for example in Bulgaria and Sri Lanka, the meanings are reversed: i.e. a movement side to side means "yes" and a movement up and down means "no"

---

I hold Sebastien responsible for my demise and demand that he apologize for I have not abused the system and I am not a cheat. I have every right to defend myself for I have used a legitimate tool at my disposal that is available to all therefore it can't be called cheating or abuse.

I can only shake my head at this.

For a bit of fun. @ Bok. Since I am not sure what is your country of origin and I can not see you shaking your head, one could assume that you are in complete agreement with me. According to the Dictionary, in particular the last paragraph:

to shake one's head (third-person singular simple present shakes one's head, present participle shaking one's head, simple past shook one's head, past participle shaken one's head)
To move one's head from side to side, in a repeated swiveling motion from the neck, to indicate disagreement, negation, disbelief, disapproval or dismay.  [quotations ▼]
(less common) To move one's head up and down, in a repeated hinge-like motion from the top of the spine, to indicate agreement, affirmation, approval, or simply polite attentiveness.  [quotations ▼]
Usage notes[edit]
A relatively quick head movement from side to side indicates an emphatic "no," while a slower motion tends to indicate disbelief or dismay.
A relatively quick head movement up and down indicates an emphatic "yes," while a slower motion tends to indicate attentiveness.
In some countries, for example in Bulgaria and Sri Lanka, the meanings are reversed: i.e. a movement side to side means "yes" and a movement up and down means "no"

In India people also tilt their heads to left and right repeatedly, what means something like "maybe".

---

Project has blocked many of user instances running GCC, WUprop and FiND@Home/Enigma@Home, probably because FiND/Enigma are not generating work recently.
So I have disconnected WUprop but if this is the new rule. Maybe ALL USERS might do "strike" against this project. And if you want to close it, that's your right as you're "the boss".

Project has blocked many of user instances running GCC, WUprop and FiND@Home/Enigma@Home, probably because FiND/Enigma are not generating work recently.
So I have disconnected WUprop but if this is the new rule. Maybe ALL USERS might do "strike" against this project. And if you want to close it, that's your right as you're "the boss".

It would be interesting to find out why he blocked Enigma. A few days ago they released new GPU apps and I am crunching them right now. Unfortunately, he has no time to inform users why he is doing it. After all, it is his project and he can do what he likes. What you need users for it only creates work for him. Do as you are told and don't ask questions is his motto..

---

Project has blocked many of user instances running GCC, WUprop and FiND@Home/Enigma@Home, probably because FiND/Enigma are not generating work recently.
So I have disconnected WUprop but if this is the new rule. Maybe ALL USERS might do "strike" against this project. And if you want to close it, that's your right as you're "the boss".

You run 8 clients on an Athlon 5350 (4 cores). So I blocked 4 instances.

Project has blocked many of user instances running GCC, WUprop and FiND@Home/Enigma@Home, probably because FiND/Enigma are not generating work recently.
So I have disconnected WUprop but if this is the new rule. Maybe ALL USERS might do "strike" against this project. And if you want to close it, that's your right as you're "the boss".

You run 8 clients on an Athlon 5350 (4 cores). So I blocked 4 instances.

Back to the start. Please tell us where does it say that the BOINC Manager that has the option to use Multiple clients is illegal to use. It is available to all users, the choice is theirs and I have not heard of any complaint from any projects that they do not want too many cores working for them. Any machine will only crunch 100% efficiently as their cores will allow. In the above case 4 cores will only use at best 50% of the cores. By using Multiple Clients and adding an additional 4 clients the machine is quite happy and the project will receive double the original output. Please consider the benefits and if you need help solving the issue perhaps discuss it with the BOINC Devs. In my case, it does not matter for I have already detached from this project. However the users should be told the reason why you are doing this. To date you have not done so or answered any question regarding it. I think what they would like to hear is why is it wrong to use Multiple Clients.

---

Well simply because it is not counting right with multiple clients. If a CPU runs only 50% of the time it receives 50% of the hours. So theoretically if a program does not utilize CPU fully but only use 50% for example, only 50% of the hours should be given. This is, of course, hard to estimate so the solution here is to give full hours regardless of utilization of given tasks.

That says, you should only get a maximum of 24 hours per core per day, and only when a cpu is completely utilized over a day. If multiple client exists then this is clearly violated and hours shall not be given since extra hours are already given for the CPU time that is not utilized in the first client.

In that sense hours from NCI is simply negligible considering its CPU usage. If you run many NCI applications to utilize your CPU completely then you should receive 24 hours per core per day, but not 24 hours per client.

You wanted to utilize your computer fully which is good - but the system already gave hours more than what you should have despite the number of clients you used, and I see no point of shouting for more hours under the new system.

I got some QCN hours removed as well, but this is alright because all hours given in the past is re-accounted so the system is fair, and in some sense, more accurate.

*

Again, as stated previously this is how I understand the new system and has nothing to do with Sebastien's thought. But seriously such game of words should end some point as those who complained are already leaving...and adding a ToS page could be a good solution.

ps. Got no hours deducted on Enigma as well as any other CPU-intensive apps. Not sure where was that from.

Project has blocked many of user instances running GCC, WUprop and FiND@Home/Enigma@Home, probably because FiND/Enigma are not generating work recently.
So I have disconnected WUprop but if this is the new rule. Maybe ALL USERS might do "strike" against this project. And if you want to close it, that's your right as you're "the boss".

You run 8 clients on an Athlon 5350 (4 cores). So I blocked 4 instances.

You're not allowing 8 clients on my 3770k. Not the 8 I want to run at least. Again, you're dictating how we run our own machines.

If I reformat my computer, which I actually want to do, all clients will be blocked.

You're not allowing 8 clients on my 3770k. Not the 8 I want to run at least. Again, you're dictating how we run our own machines.

If I reformat my computer, which I actually want to do, all clients will be blocked.

Post here or send me via PM the list of hostid you want to run.

You're not allowing 8 clients on my 3770k. Not the 8 I want to run at least. Again, you're dictating how we run our own machines.

If I reformat my computer, which I actually want to do, all clients will be blocked.

Post here or send me via PM the list of hostid you want to run.

All of them. :D

I found the one that wasn't blocked and will swap folders around so they are arranged on my computer appropriately.

I have now reattached to WuProp because I realize that by demanding I put myself in the same boat as Sebastien and the issue of abuse, cheating and use of Multiple Clients should be addressed much more positively. It is clear to me that the issue is not yet resolved for by reading this thread all I see is confusion, guessing and uncertainty.

Therefore, instead of demanding, I request that the following points be either clarified or addressed by the self appointed title of "Dictator", Sebastien. It would be nice for users of this project to know the policy of WuProp at a convenient place. Please prepare your policy once you have come to a final decision and place it in the Front Page News area for all to see.

1. What is wrong with the legitimate use of Multiple Clients? Expect more debate on this for it is part of the Boinc Software issued by Boinc Devs.

2. Why do you call users of Multiple Client cheats or at best abusing the system, when use of such option is available to all users.?

3. I am not sure if I understand your policy that has been changed twice in one week. The latest in Message 5408 which states: "If the number of multiple instances running on a host exceeds number of cores the host will be banished from WUProp." My host ID:135930 has 56 processors for example, therefore I interpret that I can run 56 instances of a project. Since using the interpretation of GCC Admin, he is running four Monkey NCI projects i.e 56 x 4 = 224 instances is my limit with this one host. Is this correct? I am asking this because you are forcing me to set up 26 computers mostly Xeon processors that needs to be set up individually causing a lot of time to do so.(That's my problem not yours).

4. Within this post titled Grid Computing Center you have stated in message: 5394 that the Radioactive and QCN projects will be closed within a week unless cheating is stopped. Please explain how users of those projects expected to know your policy that is written in a Message Post titled Grid Computing Center. You have not even explained what you consider cheating is, how do they expect that to know. May I suggest that you rectify this by posting that in the News Section for all to see. I might be retired but it would be impossible even for me to read every post in every message board every day in all Boinc Projects to find what their policy is..

My apologies Sebastien for my Demands for I should have simmered down before replying. In my old age I am getting rather abrupt and straight forward and I never did like politically correct terminology that has no meaning or hides the truth at best.

---

Back to blocking legitimate hosts I see.

I also get that this is Seb's project so he has the final say... However, despite my machine only being 4 cores, I have 125 instances of BOINC running. 1 of which runs Enigma, Goofy & WUProp, 124 of which currently just run Goofy.

I would love to put WUProp on the Goofy machines as well so I can track my hours (as my machine is legitimately crunching them. Yes, it possibly would make me look like I've done way more actual work than I have, but if I'm legitimately crunching the WUs (which you can see I am http://nci.goofyxgridathome.net/results.php?userid=24507&offset=0&show_names=0&state=4&appid=), why shouldn't I be able to log them on WUProp?

Even if you do what another user suggested and don't award stars for NCI projects or log them in a different table or something like that, I do feel it's needed to log the hours otherwise WUProp isn't getting an accurate image of how much work the projects are doing...

EDIT: When I say this, I mean that I would like to be allowed WUProp on ALL instances I run that are doing any form of work, whether that be NCI or CPU/GPU...

Chris

---

I wish to utilize the maximum use of my machines but I am still not sure just how many nci apps I can run without penalty.

Please confirm how many instances of 4 applications that is currently issued by nci.goofyxgridathome on my 56 core machine. Based on that reply I will adjust my other machines according to the number of cores they have.

---