Testing all K values

[smh]

On the primenumbers mailing list Ray Ballinger (the previous coordinator of the Sierpinski project) wrote:


Greetings,
Much of the discord lately between the two groups of searchers of
Sierpinki numbers occurred as a result of the SB project
coordinators initiating testing of all remainder k values without
notifying any of the previous testers of those same numbers. This
resulted in some duplication of effort. It was also felt to be poor
manners and counter to the collaborative efforts in prime number
searches to date. An apology was issued by the SB folks for not
notifying prior testers but the search of all remaining values of k
continued.
Some of the "older" searchers enjoy the flexibility of George
Woltman's PRP program and Yves Gallot's
Proth program over the automated procedure run by SB. It is a bit
ironic that the SB program benefits greatly in speed as a result of
help from George Woltman. I suggested this to the SB programmers at
the beginning of their effort and have personally made some
contribution to SB testing. I would encourage the SB project
coordinators to make a prominent acknowledgement of the contribution
of others such as Woltman, Jobling and Gallot to the success of the
project. I believe some of the "older" testers will wish to continue
testing with PRP. On a personal note, I apologize for the lack of
updates on the web site I help to run. Drastic changes in the health
of a couple of my family members and an onerous (soon to be changed)
job have prevented me from contributing as much as I would like in
the last year and a half.

Regards,
Ray Ballinger


I was under the impression that all previous searchers new that SoB was also going to test their K value. Apparentaly that was not the case for some of them. Although it's everybody's right to test any number he wants, i think it would have been good if this would have been coordinated a bit better.:haddock:

[Samidoost]

Louie

Please read carefully the posts in PrimeNumbers Yahoogroups. I believe that we have a seriouse problem there, and YOU are responsible for putting everything on its exact position.

First, I think it is necessary to kindly apologize from all the individuals whose reserved k values are under SB attack.

Second, It is appropriate to credit ALL the works done before SB in a good place in your home page.

I can help you finding historical details about the Sierpinski problem.

Payam:swear:

[jjjjL]

If the discovery hadn't happened when it did, we would have had time to put together a page of people to thank. one will be put together when we get back. it was all we could do at the time to put up what we did before we had to leave to see our families for the holidays.


Sadly, Ray's comments are some of the more carefully chosen words i've seen on that forum. And also possibly the only informed ones. From the begining, that yahoo forum has been a haven of SB bashing... long before even the latest spat of criticism. I have seen so many negitive things posted there... it's so sad. And honestly, I think Ray is the only one there who has any idea what's really going on. He did recieve the majority of my (lengthy) corrispondence with Wilfrid before and after he decided to take down his site. Everyone else there is just dealing with frustration and lashing out at SB. I feel especially bad for Phil as I did use his sieveing data and now he apprently hates us even though he doesn't know us. I'm sorry man, I still want to thank you though. Same goes for Ian Lowman and all the other previous searchers. Thank you for the work you have done. No one here has forgetten your efforts and the amature math community appriciates your support.

Anyway, here's why I'm not worried... none of these people know us or understand any of the things we've done. I haven't seen a negitive comment come from anyone who has ever even bothered to email us. I've never seen anyone on their forum mention one of my emails to Keller in which I offered to let the individual participants choose to keep their k values. I gave him suggestions on ways the two searches could continue together. No one knows that side of the story... the one where I tried to explain and work with someone who I just couldn't get across to. Instead of talking to me, Keller blew me off, takes down his site, poisons the minds of everyone he knows and then sends me dictionary definitions like i'm an 8 year old. So, yeah it was hard to work with the other searchers and it was mostly because their former organiser had absolutely zero respect for me. I'll probably never know why that was... I can guess, but then I would only be doing what the people on yahoo are... making stuff up to get angery about. All I know for sure is Wilfrid Keller clearly stated that he is no longer interested in organizing a second search and that he was also no longer interested in recieving corrispondence about it. He also wished SB good luck in spite of our differences so kudos to him. Thanks.

As for why all the k values, I don't think I need to justify this. I think a better way to look at it is to ask "why does one person deserve their own k value? why can't they share?" as Phil and others have said, it's not just about production, but I think it's great to see hundreds of people using the best tool possible for a job as opposed to 6 people limiting the effectiveness of a mass effort. there is no reason the participants in the other search couldn't use SB but they are so pationately jealous and upset that I doubt that can happen.

if you can't tell, i'm a little sick of playing math politics. i'm especially sick of playing it with hostile outsiders who somehow think that sending me venomous emails will somehow influence me to do something. none of the emails have offered a single suggestion to guide me. everyone who actually has written me to complain (i think 3 emails) refuses to even suggest what i should do. i have asked everyone who writes me if they have advice for me on what i should do... no one has offered any. even they know that I did the best thing under the circumstances after they know what those circumstances were.

honestly, i'm a nice guy. i'm a sociable guy. if you have concerns, don't post about SB's shortcomings on other forums... write me. just send me a kind email asking me why i did something the way i did and i'll tell you exactly what the circumstances were that lead to my discission. if one of the former searchers whats to reserve a range of n for a given k, i'd be happy to talk with them and possibly organize that now that Keller can't. if you have other ideas that you think would be good, please share them with me.

please spread my message to yahoo or anywhere else where there is a misunderstanding. i want to see these people use their energies to start making postive suggestions to help guide SB.


Cheers,
-Louie

[smh]

Originally posted by Samidoost
Louie

Please read carefully the posts in PrimeNumbers Yahoogroups. I believe that we have a seriouse problem there, and YOU are responsible for putting everything on its exact position.

First, I think it is necessary to kindly apologize from all the individuals whose reserved k values are under SB attack.

Second, It is appropriate to credit ALL the works done before SB in a good place in your home page.

I can help you finding historical details about the Sierpinski problem.

Payam:swear:

Louie,

I've just been reading the posts in the Yahoo group. I've no idea what went wrong between you and the people in that group. I see a lot of very childish posts there. But i think some are right if they feel you took over their searches. You should only have started assigning numbers which you had reserved there and which were offered too you by the old searchers.

Of course i agree that no one can claim any number, but still, they were first and you should have respected that.

I see that the prime isn't submitted to the top 5000 list, but make sure you got a proper prover code (which also includes the prime proving program, George for the highly optimised code, and the author of the sieving software).

I think YOU should write a mail to that list explaining things and give credit who deserves it.

just my €0,02

[jjjjL]

have you been reading the posts over there?

some of them have started rumors without even reading the site. i see some people claiming that we didn't prove the number was prime because SB does a prp test. yeah, we know, of course we did a full proth test after the number was identified. we did it (several times) long before we made the announcement. bottom line is that i am actually doing things and they are whining. for all their words, i don't see anyone offering a positive idea. a man who has run out of good ideas is just a critic -- and as these people are proving -- anyone can be a critic. i do not plan to post on their forum. if you wish to defend SB against attack in there, by all means do but i have a feeling some of them want to be mad at SB no matter what i do so there's nothing i can do to help them.

also do realize that these folks represent a vocal minority of about six people. most of the former searchers are communicating with me. today i recieved an email from the searcher of k=19249. he told me he's still testing parts of that k. that's cool with me, so the k is his until he decides what n value he might want to let SB start working on it. any of the other searchers are welcome to email me too. if you ever saw the old Sierpinski site, it was obviously hard to tell who was really still involved and who was just a place holder for k values. sometimes dates where updated when it seemed like no data was added. sometimes people's names would be moved around to replace blanks as people quit. i saw a funny comment mixed in with all the rumors over there. i'll leave you with it:


"well, isn't that a little ridiculous to say 'this is MY k?' i mean, if you're going to do that, then i will just reserve the right to exclusively test and prove Goldbach's conjecture for the next 100 years"

;)