Enhancement request

[KWSN_Millennium2001Guy]

Could you add a stats page, preferably all text (tab delimited would be great), with no html that has ALL individual stats for everybody crunching? It would greatly aid in creating the stats graphs such as Statsman's. Right now we can only find an individual's stats if they belong to a team, and apparently there are quite a few individual crunchers that have chosen no team affiliation which are getting left off the stats.

Thanks for your consideration.

Ni!

[Auritania]

Originally posted by KWSN_Millennium2001Guy
Could you add a stats page, preferably all text (tab delimited would be great), with no html that has ALL individual stats for everybody crunching?

I would also like to see this. And as an addition to that request might I suggest adding a unique identifier for each user? It might make keeping stats much easier and more consistent. It is very (too?) easy to hide/loose a user basing identification on the username/organization combo. Maybe this is asking too much though.

[Brian the Fist]

There is now a "teamless users" page. Check it out from the Teams link on the main page. Make sure I didn't mess up the normal team stats in the process :D
As for unique identifiers, that is what the handle is for, but these are not, and will not, be printed with the stats. I d not see why this is necessary - each person appears on exactly one team (or the teamless users team), exactly once, so there is no duplication. It is in fact completely valid for 2 different people to have the same username and organization so this should not be used a uniqueness test..

[KWSN_Millennium2001Guy]

Thanks Howard, and especially thanks for the lightning response. :) This is a very big step in the right direction to help the stats keepers.

A unique ID WOULD be a great help. One of the biggest problems the stats keepers have is when a user changes their name and/or team, it really messes with the team totals and is nearly impossible to match up the users to show a history of production for that user. The unique ID allows the history to accurately reflect the individual's contributions.

I understand why you would want to keep the existing userkey secret, because it is half of the userid/password pair which should be kept secret so people don't jack other's accounts.

Thanks again Howard,

and Ni! :cool: :D

[Auritania]

Originally posted by Brian the Fist
I d not see why this is necessary - each person appears on exactly one team (or the teamless users team), exactly once, so there is no duplication. It is in fact completely valid for 2 different people to have the same username and organization so this should not be used a uniqueness test..

3rd party statistics is where this is necessary. You have a method to track any unique individual by their handle. The 3rd party stats tracking doesn't. Where a public ID would help is when users change teams or names or organizations. I think people really like the 3rd party stats. They like seeing hourly, daily and weekly production rates as well as comparing their rates to others and seeing what the "big guns" are putting out. There are at least 4 different stats systems that I know of. None of them seemingly can reliably track a user that moves or changes info.

As for all users on one page, I like that idea a lot. Currently, to get the information, I believe you have to load each teams page and find the information. I would think that one large text page would be preferable to loading a couple hundrend team pages for all concerned. However, it has occured to me that perhaps you have a reason for making user information and statistics a little more fuzzy and less reliable than many would like. It would follow with your apparent policy for user privacy and I can understand that.

Just some thoughts and observations. Keep up the great work and please try to get that blasted auto update to work! :)

[Auritania]

Oh, one other thing while I'm in complain mode and got someone's attention. ;) On the statistics you keep on the DF site for the lowest RMS, it doesn't actually keep all the smallest. Last night (4/2) I had the smallest structure at 2.31. This morning, Ive got the smallest again at 2.26 but my old 2.31 is gone. The next smallest showing is 2.32. Is this by design so no user shows twice in the top 10 lowest ? (ok, i'll admit it... I mostly would just like to have the #1 and #2 structures for maybe the only time ever, but hey, #1 is ok too :p )

[Brian the Fist]

That is correct, we only keep the best structure from each user so you cant have both #1 and #2 (for example). This is a storage limitation really (we cant store 1 billion structures!). It is extremely rare that any one person will generate more than one structure in the top ten, so consider yourself very lucky (unless you cheated ;) ). We still have the data (e.g. energy, RMSD and so on) on ALL the structures though, just not the actual structure to be viewed.

[MAD-ness]

Looking from a purely scientific standpoint, I can see how statistics are not a top priority. They shouldn't be, the science should be the top priority.

However, because you are relying on volunteers, gaining/keeping participants and enabling/encouraging users to maximize thier contributions is an IMPORTANT aspect of the project.

While it doesn't make sense to make major changes to the project simply to satisfy stats fans, stats DO have a large impact upon participation. Not only are stats a good motivator and something that attracts participants to a project, the stats programs and pages are done by volunteers who are contributing to the community and the project. Basically, you have participants and statsmakers, both of whom are willing and able to contribute resources to the project. All you have to do is provide the statsmakers with certain types of raw data in a somewhat reasonable format and they do all the work manipulating that data and eventually presenting that data to project participants.

I understand the focus on privacy and if some sort of unique public ID isn't a realistic possibility I don't really think that will be a major issue (project integrity and user security obviously trump ease of stats generation) but I think that if you can add some slight tweaking and expansion of the .txt file stats output in order to accomodate the statsmakers it will be more than worthwhile in the long run in a concrete sense (more production).

Just my $.02

[pointwood]

I know this is a very old thread and I risk getting my name displayed in pink in the official stats :p However, this issue is getting discussed again and again, so I'll take the risk and bump this thread ;)

Originally posted by Brian the Fist
As for unique identifiers, that is what the handle is for, but these are not, and will not, be printed with the stats. I d not see why this is necessary - each person appears on exactly one team (or the teamless users team), exactly once, so there is no duplication. It is in fact completely valid for 2 different people to have the same username and organization so this should not be used a uniqueness test.. You are correct, each person exists only once - in your stats. No one asks you to make the handles public, but my best guess is that it would be pretty easy to add a second unique id that is made public to make life easier for the third-party stats-engines. That shouldn't be a problem in regards to privacy and security.

You are also correct in saying that username + organization should not be used as a uniqueness test, but as far as I know, that is currently the best way to do it. It is easy for you to say, since you have the handles ;)

What the third-party stats-engines are providing, is stats (graphs, comparisons, history tracking and such) that the official stats doesn't provide, but the lack of a way to uniquely identify each user, makes that very difficult to create properly.

Ps. Again, I know this is far from critical to the project. However, I firmly believe that stats is an important part for projects like this since that is the main incentive for most people to run the client. There are lots of other projects. Being better (in every way possible without sacrificing the science) than the others, will make people prefer this project instead of the others. This is one of the few things that I think, could make it even more attractive than it already is.

[IronBits]

You mean like, insert a new column, linked to the 'handle', then start with the number 1.
0000001 for the first person in the database
0000002 for the second person
0000003 for the third person
That would be TOO SIMPLE, but, you know what? That would allow 3rd party stats engines to kick out some incredible stats and histories.
It's what they/we have asked for since day one or three :rolleyes:

Howard, can you get one of the database admins to do this?
Wouldn't take much time, and it would mean alot to all the stats makers out there.
Pointwood :D is speaking for ALOT of folks, and like it or not, the STATS is what brings the computers to the table to crunch the data.
This has been one of the BEST projects I have worked on. There is only two things wrong/bad.
One is the lack of a userID number associated to a 'handle' that we don't see so can't use.
The other is the enormous upload bandwidth requirement.
If the latter was taken care of, more corporate farmers would be able to participate.
If the first one is done, incredible stats graphs could be built which would bring all the statsaholics running.
Oh, and up/down proxy support
Thanks Howard! :notworthy

[Brian the Fist]

There are no 'database admins' for this project, I'm all you get. Plus one other person who helped set up the new backend.

Anyways, my original concern was not the difficulty in adding a column (which isnt as trivial as you may think) but rather whether some people might not WANT to be tracked. I suppose if there's no major objections I can add this, but what would you have be do, add an extra column to all the team pages (at least the text versions that stats guys parse) listing their pointless user numbers, just for teh purpose of parsing?

The 'less data' to upload is coming soon too , though I can't guarantee Ill have time to do it before the next update.

[Auritania]

An auto-incremented published unique identifier in numeric format? That would be a good thing.

Pointwoods stats in pink... thats not such a bad idea either ;)

[pointwood]

I'm beginning to regret that I mentioned that color :bang: :p

But if that's what it takes, so be it ;)

I couldn't see why anyone would have any problems with it. If someone wants to be completely anonymous, then they can just leave the username and organization fields blank.

You're da' man, Howard :thumbs:

[Dyyryath]

Brian, another column displaying a unique identifier (other than the user's handle) in the stats would be PERFECT. I realize it's just another thing that you have to deal with, but with it those of us building stats for your project can do some really cool stuff. :thumbs:

Pointwood: If you've successfully managed to convince Howard that this is worth doing, I'll make sure your stats on my pages are NEVER pink. :D

[pointwood]

:rotfl: :smoking:

[Auritania]

Originally posted by Dyyryath

Pointwood: If you've successfully managed to convince Howard that this is worth doing, I'll make sure your stats on my pages are NEVER pink. :D

I'll even give you a gold star. But I can't make any promises on the pink thing.

[Halon50]

The only reason I can think up in favor of complete anonymity would be if someone didn't want work traced back to them. The only reason I can think for that would be if the particular user has installed the client on machines he or she has no permissions to access. Even then, they can be traced by their unique handle.
So, if it helps the stats-mongers track their progress, then I'm all in favor of a secondary "unique ID." :cheers:

Also, thanks for the update on the upload reduction. I'm currently on dialup, and have a couple machines stacking several MB of data until I can get DSL into the new place. This project definitely isn't dialup-friendly!

[runestar]

Anybody ever compare the download/upload speeds of different projects to DF?

Once DF gets its update, there's nothing more to download though until the next protein change. Its all uploading.

SETI has a big download, small upload, and Folding I believe is the opposite.

Howard, I don't know if you looked at FAH... but what they do is simply update a "core" instead of the whole program often times... Its SUPPOSE to auto-engage... but doesn't always work quite right. Sometimes you end up having to close down the client and restarting to get the core to work right.

At any rate, we'll see how the next couple of versions hash out... Just can't get enough of those colored worms. ^_^

TTFN,

RS½

[pmfp]

Originally posted by Halon50
The only reason I can think for that would be if the particular user has installed the client on machines he or she has no permissions to access.

This probably sound weird, very weird to some:
but there are those that would like to recieve as little attention possible... and not necessarily due to running on computers for which they do not have permission. Even though the chance/risk of catching others interest is small, all ability to avoid running through the light is appreciated. It's just simply so that some do not want to be seen, heard nor traced.

I vote against unique numbers. I do, however, vote for a long list of current crunchers. Would be cool to see what one have left before overtaking the next position, or losing it.

[Dyyryath]

I can understand the 'low profile' argument, believe me. I've been running systems both at home and at work (I'm a System Administrator) on various projects since 1999.

However, a unique ID for stats tracking doesn't really affect that partiular aspect of the project. It wouldn't exist on your client machine. It would exist only on the stats pages themselves. There would also be no way for anyone but Howard to determine what handle goes with that ID.

It certainly wouldn't shed any more light on 'borged' machines at all.

Essentially, it wouldn't mean anything to anyone but Howard. It's simply a way for us (stats guys) to make more and better stats.

[pmfp]

Mmmmm... right.

[IronBits]

An example is in order to aleviate any fears of exposure.
Let's assume the following -


UniqueHandle WUs or points NickName
xyzzyxyzzy 100,100,100 IronBits
When Howard runs stats, he does it with the UniqueHandle, which is always static, never changes.


xyzzyxyzzy 100,100,101 xyzzy <-- sneaky IB horsing around. ;)
When using the 'nickname' which is not static, a slight change in the NickName will create chaos and confuse any 3rd party stats tracking attempts.
Now, let's do the same thing, this time with an additional uniqueID, which is static just like Howard's UniqueHandle.


UniqueID UniqueHandle WUs or points NickName
0000001 xyzzyxyzzy 100,100,100 IronBits
Now we have two static Unique fields, one for Howard, one for 3rd party stats engines.
Now folks like Dyyryath, can use the UniqueID, just like Howard uses his UniqueHandle.
Now if there is a change in the NickName, it will have no effect on either the UniqueID or UniqueHandle.
The only person that knows which UniqueHandle goes to what UniqueID or NickName, would be Howard, period. There is no way for anyone to figure out the UniqueHandle.


UniqueID WUs or points NickName
0000001 100,100,100 IronBits
0000001 100,100,100 xyzzy <-- sneaky IB horsing around. ;)
This is all that is shown. The above example could not fool the 3rd party stats engines anymore.
It's a win win for everyone. :D

[Scoofy12]

Good post from IB... but i suppose it's possible not to want to be tracked at all. In that case, we could agree on a nickname that will cause its owner to not show up or be ignored by the stats engines. So if you change your name to "DontTrackMe" (or none or whatever) you wont show up on statsman's or dyy's page, and can crunch in complete privacy if you want.

[IronBits]

Good point Scoofy12!
Maybe on the signup form, a check box saying assign uniqueID for team stats tracking purposes only /me shrugs
If the person is NOT on a Team, I don't believe the stats are tracked for individuals, so no worries.

[Dyyryath]

I'd certainly have no problems setting up a stats engine to ignore users who don't want to be tracked.

However, as IB has pointed out, all users are ALREADY tracked by a unique ID. Adding a second (with no way to link it to the first) can't really change the level of privacy we now have.

Of course, I'm well aware that I'm not infalliable, so if someone can give me an example of how it would be detrimental, I'd be the first one to say "maybe it's not such a good idea after all."

[pmfp]

Ok, I think I'm up to speed now, still favor Scoofy's idea though. :)

I guess (just a loud thought as a confirmation... making sure I got it right) as Howard would not give out any info one can recieve if you have DB access, the only thing the outside would know is ones "fake" ID number, a nickname and a number for the structures created (perhaps lowest RMSD)... that should be allright.

Mmm, Howard... he really must have a big workload.

[Brian the Fist]

I still intend to add the UID field when we change proteins next.
That is a good idea though, that if they make their username blank don't track their stats or something like that. Im sure some people may have reasons they dont want to be tracked and they should have that choice still but ill leave that up to th 3rd party stats dudes.

[Dyyryath]

Originally posted by Brian the Fist
I still intend to add the UID field when we change proteins next.

Outstanding! :thumbs: :D

Now all we have to do is decide on a name for people to use who don't want their stats tracked by 3rd party engines.

Perhaps it shouldn't be just a name, but an addon to a name. That would allow them to still differentiate themselves from others who don't want 3rd party engines tracking them. This way if they still want to see themselves on the 'official' stats pages they can.

How about adding [HIDE] to the end (or beginning) of their name?

For instance, my username would go from:

Dyyryath

to

Dyyryath[HIDE]

It'd be trivial for stats guys to parse these users out and put them all together in an entry called 'Hidden Users' or some such so that any work they do towards a team still counts.

And...since they'd still have the UID, if they wanted to suddenly show up, they could just change their name to drop the [HIDE] tag and be in the stats in the next update. Obviously it would work the same way in reverse. ;)

[reader50]

This is not needed. Us real stats guys have already solved the matching problem with existing data. Besides, adding a UID will allow all the other stats guys to have comparable stats to Team MacNN's, without having to do the code work. This goes against work ethics. :)

[Dyyryath]

Heh, I knew you were working on this and had found a good work around. :thumbs:

My ethic, however, goes a little something like this 'work smarter, not harder'. :D

UID's are the simplest, most elegant solution to the problem. ;)

Besides, I've got a REALLY LONG list of things I'll add now that user tracking is simple and clean. Somebody's got to keep you guys on your toes. :cool:

BTW, I've taken a look at your stats. Very nice! (For a bunch of upstarts) :D :D

[IronBits]

Originally posted by Brian the Fist
I still intend to add the UID field when we change proteins next.

Thanks Howard! :D

[pointwood]

Thanks Howard :thumbs:

I'm just happy that I now never should see my name in pink, at least as long as I uses Dyyryaths stats :p :D

In regards to staying anonymous, if a participant doesn't enter any username, organisation and don't join a team, how will anyone (besides Howard) be able to identify them? Yes, you'll be able to track the user with that unique ID, but you'll never know who it is.

Dyyryath: I think your suggestion is a bit flawed. If I would like to see the users that want to stay anonymous, I could just grab the stats directly from distributedfolding.org and filter out anyone that doesn't use the [HIDE] tag. For this to work, the users that wants to stay anonymous, should be anonymous in all stats that are available, including the official stats. As I wrote above, as long as a user doesn't enter any info besides what is required, no one will be able to know who the user is behind that unique id. If it should be completely anonymous, Howard could just filter out all the users without a username (those that currently shows up as "None" in the stats).

[Brian the Fist]

As I said above (if you actually bothered to read beyond the first sentence :spank: ) a user should be anonymous by leaving a blank username. None of this [HIDE] business. Then don't track their stats in that case. The default for a new user is no username so this works well with our philosophy. By default you are anonymous and if you assign yourself a username, you are making a conscious decision to become not anonymous...

[IronBits]

I'll go along with that Howard. So simple to... :)

[Dyyryath]

There was more to your post than the first line? I hadn't noticed... :moon:

No name works for me. ;)

I certainly didn't mean to complicate the issue (though it wouldn't have affected you anyway), but I wasn't sure if people didn't want to get tracked at all, or just in 3rd party stats, which can offer a whole lot more information than what's available on the 'official' stats. There's a bit of a difference between seeing a username and a total WUs completed, and seeing production graphs and hourly lists showing exactly how much work is being done, and more importantly for some people when it's being done. Fact of the matter is, I've got history for everyone I'm tracking going back almost 6 months and that much information might be more than they want displayed, though just a name and a total doesn't bother them.

At any rate, if the blank username works for everyone else, I'm good with it, as it just makes things easier for me. I already spend more time on this than I probably should...

[FoBoT]

Originally posted by Brian the Fist
you are making a conscious decision to become not anonymous...
isn't that "un-anonymous" ? ;)

thank you!!

this change will stop the name change messing with the 3rd party stats, yay!
:|party|:

:notworthy

[Scoofy12]

Originally posted by FoBoT

isn't that "un-anonymous" ? ;)


no, i think that woudl be "nonymous" or maybe "onymous" :D

[runestar]

I haven't seen this mentioned in the posts so i would to ask Howard can't you just include a switch in the profile that a user can check to be anonymous?

In that case, the user would still be on the charts but dependant on how you set it, the name would either be says the random public UID you are creating or says a reserved handle such as Anon0001, which could be randomly generated also. Nobody but the user would still know what the corresponding account would be.

This way the various stats engine could still track properly anonymous crunchers to keep the charts right, but no fear of the individual being "found out."

Right now you don't display the total a user has finished on the client, so there's no way to say match that up to any of the stats.

Best,

RuneStar½

P.S. Hope this make senses and I'm not covering any ground already covered... posting right after waking may not be the best time. ;)

[pmfp]

I think the ideas previously suggested were the best, Runestar's excluded. The idea after all is not to bring attention, and the best way to do that is to not be there, or at least not show that you are. Otherwise this would all be over by changing your username, or removing it completely -hence your idea is pretty much useless.

pmfp sends

[Auritania]

Originally posted by runestar½
I haven't seen this mentioned in the posts so i would to ask Howard can't you just include a switch in the profile that a user can check to be anonymous?

In that case, the user would still be on the charts but dependant on how you set it, the name would either be says the random public UID you are creating or says a reserved handle such as Anon0001, which could be randomly generated also. Nobody but the user would still know what the corresponding account would be.


Instead, how about everyone is automatically assigned an anonymous handle and then is required to change that handle to not be anonymous? Since everyone would be the same name, they would only be identifiable by a pseudo-random unique but generic public ID. Everyone would automatically be anonymous and unique. If you wanted to make yourself identifiable in any way, you would change your handle. Then to become anonymous again all you would have to do is change your handle back to the original assigned one. You could even make yourself even more identifiable by having a second field in addition to your handle field to add more info. That might be asking a little too much though.

Oh... wait............

[pmfp]

Originally posted by Auritania
Everyone would automatically be anonymous and unique.

I've said my opinion already. I would, however, like to point out that you're not anonymous if you're unique.

pmfp sends

[Auritania]

Originally posted by pmfp


I've said my opinion already. I would, however, like to point out that you're not anonymous if you're unique.

pmfp sends

So that means by being identifiable I am identified?

[runestar]

Well, the problem is, if you have 250 "Anonymous" people... you may end with just one "Anonymous" on 3rd party stat charts.

And you're still not identifiable because there is still no way to link the public handle to the account short of hacking into the DF servers, which is going to sound really good in court. "We hacked into someone else's servers so we could find out who was running non-authorized software on our machines..."

You're not being identified... you are simply a random anon handle... its like a poll... they don't say so and so at such and such resident reported this. Its reponsdee # xqyz3489 gave these responses.

All things considered, if someone wanted privacy, they shouldn't be running these projects anyways because there is a certain amount of information that is requested to be given in the first place.

Actually, the name should be the least of people who want to run D.C. clients anonymously on work machines. There are things such as loggers and network logs that could more quickly track you down.

Just some more random thoughts...

RS½

[Paratima]

Originally posted by Scoofy12
no, i think that woudl be "nonymous" or maybe "onymous" :D Scoofy wins the wordsmithing prize!

The word derives from Latin "an" + "onymous" = "not named" or simply, "unnamed". :cool:

The opposite, of course, would be "named" or "known".

[pmfp]

Originally posted by Auritania


So that means by being identifiable I am identified?

No, obviously not. You need somebody to be searching for you first, but the statement still stands:
if you are unique, you can be found. Of course one can be found even if you're not special too, but the odds are better, and more based on factors outside of oneself. This is not limited to DF, rather not directly connected to it.

You guys have been pretty much correct, I've been overreacting a BIT. Force of habit.

pmfp sends

[runestar]

Since it says Enhancement Request and to lighten things up a bit...


What if it glowed in the dark? ;)

RS½

[MAD-ness]

Great news! :)

I am no coder, but I have spent quite a few hours sitting around trying to figure out how to deal with user records without having a unique identifier and it is pretty rough. While the macnn guys seem to do well with it, I don't know how they did it or how accurate it is (though it is definitely better than I have seen elsewhere).

Anyways, another good enhancement to the project that should pay longterm dividends.

[Brian the Fist]

First just a minor correction. When you first sign up, your username is 'None' as opposed to Blank. So 3rd party stats guys: ignore anyone whose username is 'None'.

When I say ignore, I suggest that means totally ignore, like they don't exist (except for computing aggregate team totals, etc). The important thing as methioned above is they don't draw attention to themselves, so they should not appear on individual stats, except on the main web site where they will appear on their team page, and in the top 10 is they make it that far.

I will not list the top UID on the top 10 page or the graphical stats pages, only on the text pages that eventually get parsed by the stats keepers. And I think I will print a UID of ZERO for anyone with username 'None' to enforce this in fact (but they'll still have a real UID which will appear if they change usernames), I think this will allow users to keep their anonymity complete, by default.
So assume this is now an official decision, subject to any strong objections you may have that I may have not thought about...

[Auritania]

Originally posted by Brian the Fist
First just a minor correction. When you first sign up, your username is 'None' as opposed to Blank. So 3rd party stats guys: ignore anyone whose username is 'None'.

When I say ignore, I suggest that means totally ignore, like they don't exist (except for computing aggregate team totals, etc). The important thing as methioned above is they don't draw attention to themselves, so they should not appear on individual stats, except on the main web site where they will appear on their team page, and in the top 10 is they make it that far.

I will not list the top UID on the top 10 page or the graphical stats pages, only on the text pages that eventually get parsed by the stats keepers. And I think I will print a UID of ZERO for anyone with username 'None' to enforce this in fact (but they'll still have a real UID which will appear if they change usernames), I think this will allow users to keep their anonymity complete, by default.
So assume this is now an official decision, subject to any strong objections you may have that I may have not thought about...

Why am I feeling like we took 3 steps forward and 2 steps back? What it ultimately means is that anyone that wants to remain anonymous will be penalized for that by being excuded from any sort of advanced statistics. You don't need a unique ID field at all if the None accounts are to be excluded. If that is the official word then so be it.

Signing off............

[Brian the Fist]

That is really up to the stats keepers but the whole point of anonymity as we already discussed is you will not have your detailed stats tracked over time, and keep a low profile. Its not penalization; simply if you eant to be tracked you shouldnt be anonymous, which is intuitive to me anyways.

To the stats keepers - assume the format of the text file will remain the same except the UID column (a number, no commas) will be inserted between rank and username on the text team pages. The star for the team leader will still precede the username and thus come after the UID number. And it will be zero if the user is None.

[Dyyryath]

Thanks, Howard, that works for me. :thumbs:

[Scotttheking]

Originally posted by Brian the Fist
That is really up to the stats keepers but the whole point of anonymity as we already discussed is you will not have your detailed stats tracked over time, and keep a low profile. Its not penalization; simply if you eant to be tracked you shouldnt be anonymous, which is intuitive to me anyways.

To the stats keepers - assume the format of the text file will remain the same except the UID column (a number, no commas) will be inserted between rank and username on the text team pages. The star for the team leader will still precede the username and thus come after the UID number. And it will be zero if the user is None.

Anonymity is already there. Your username has no link to your real name. That's the anonymity.

If a user doesn't want to be tracked, they can either not do the project, or not be on a team. Plain and simple.

The purpose of my team's stats is to track our team in exquisite detail. If anyone on our team doesn't like that, they know how to leave the team.

That's my stance. I'll talk it over with reader50 tonight (he actually makes the stats) to see what he says.

--Scott

[pointwood]

Hmm...you shouldn't join af team if you don't want to be tracked.

Basically, if something shouldn't be tracked, then it shouldn't be in the official stats. It's the best way to do it IMHO. The other way will not provide the user with that privacy anyway, since it only takes one person to create some stats that do track it and you certainly can't be sure that every person that creates some stats, will see your request about what to track.

However, if you don't enter any username, organisation and so on, then I can't see what's the problem - nobody will ever be able to know who you are.

If you want complete anonymity, then you probably shouldn't/wouldn't join at all.

[reader50]

My own opinion is that we are providing stats services (entertainment really) to anyone who wishes to join our team. As such, it's imperative that our team have better / more accurate stats than any other team, as a recruiting advantage. This is the reason I'm going to be losing days of sleep in the coming months to stay ahead of Statsman and Dyy. :D

Removing stats services for members of our team who do not wish to declare themselves is .... well, cruel. Stand up and be counted, or we will pretend you are not here.

Our stats actually parse from the html pages, I had not gotten around to switching to the text versions yet, even though that would slightly reduce server load. If the project is going to supply unreliable UIDs, then I'll have to stick with our internal ones. We already have very close to 100% match accuracy, with a few more error traps and a manual edit option, we should reach 100%.

I'd rather leave the funny book keeping to government budgeting. ;)

Note, we do not identify who anonymous users are. We just provide a consistent name and number for them to check their production against others ... if they wish to. To actually print who they are or where they live, I would have to admit hacking into the project servers last month for that data. Naturally, I ... um, would not know anything about that.

[Ody]

I think I need to agree with the last few people. If you want to remain anonymous, then don't join a team, don't use a name that would identify yourself, or don't do the project. Some people don't want to put in a name, and just because of that now they can't get cool 3rd party stats...

[runestar]

Actually, there is a way to join a team and retain a certain anonymity... if the team doesn't have one, create a generic team account user that anyone can contribute too. This is especially good for those that want to participate in the project but aren't particularly concerned about the stats.

Best,

RuneStar½

P.S. I think the main concern

[reader50]

Upon further thought, Team MacNN withdraws all objections to the proposed UID methods. :)

[Auritania]

Originally posted by reader50
Upon further thought, Team MacNN withdraws all objections to the proposed UID methods. :)

Makes sense. Remove all the accounts that cause problems. There are only about 5 accounts on your team you have to start ignoring and not display or track. TSF will be reduced by 80 accounts and I haven't looked at the other teams. Thing is.... won't it make your stats less complete than they are now, being required to ignore all the accounts with None? There will be quite a bit of production you won't be able to track in detail. If you are happy with less that's ok too.

[Brian the Fist]

Ok, well if you are talking about your particular team's stats that you are tracking then by all means go ahead and do it in gory detail, Im more concerned about the 'None' users that are not on a team. Anyways, Ill leave it at zero uid for 'None' users for now and if this causes great problems let me know, it can easily be altered.

For those of you who do not know, do NOT parse individual HTML team pages. There is a 'secret' file (oops) called 'teampages.tar.gz' which is created with the stats every 10 minutes and contains all the text stats pages in it. So just grab this ONE file and it has everything you need in it and saves everybody some bandwidth.

[pointwood]

So, all users on team that haven't entered a username (the "None" users), will not have a unique id?

If that is true, what happens if I later remove my username?

[Auritania]

Originally posted by Brian the Fist
Ok, well if you are talking about your particular team's stats that you are tracking then by all means go ahead and do it in gory detail, Im more concerned about the 'None' users that are not on a team. Anyways, Ill leave it at zero uid for 'None' users for now and if this causes great problems let me know, it can easily be altered.


Then how about displaying the unique ID field for the None users that are on a team? That would seem to be a fair compromise. Those users did, in some way, request to be somehow identified when joining a team. The None users not on a team can have a hidden ID.

[pmfp]

Um, I don't know how some here are thinking, but this is my POV:
If you want anonymity (sp?) to the degree of not attracting attention for creating many structures (e.g.), then you would NOT join a team anyway.
If somebody wants to be on a team but still remain "somewhat anonymous", then they can just change their username to some random numbers and/or letters, or whatever they favor.

Howard, thumbs up.

pmfp sends

[Auritania]

Howard:

Thank you for the UID in the teams.

:)