I think if certain people would stop "reacting" to the term "Folders feel they are in the dark" and start actually listening to Folders, they might just have a chance at understanding the meaning.  If after reading the above thoughts shared by real-world Folders, one can't understand the meaning of "in the dark", then there is a hearing problem.  Some of the people from the FAH forum think that just because they say something, that we are all supposed to believe that it was PG speaking.  I place credibility in what I actually hear from PG (or Dr. Pande) not from people that decide to try to speak for PG. 
 
The bottom-line on this "in the dark" subject is that PG themselves speaks way too infrequently to satisfy the needs of donors to understand what is happening with Folding.  We can dismiss that need for any number of reasons, but it doesn't invalidate the needs of donors.  That is one of my largest concerns with PG.  They just don't seem to understand people-needs very well.  We are in fact their "customers" and without us they would be in a world of hurt being successful at what they do.  So, all I've been saying (for a long time now) is that effective communications (not long periods of silence) are key and necessary to maintaining customer interest.  That is a simple and universal concept that can be used in just about any customer environment. 
 
PG would do well to listen and learn from donors to improve upon their communications.  If that can't be done, then just continue and accept that donor population will not be maximized.  Seems I keep hearing from Dr. Pande how he wants many more Folders world-wide.  Well, they need some help in the communications (and listening) department if they actually want to see that realized.

Afterburner
This thread is about finding ways for us to become even more successful.

AB, I'm very much in favor of the sentence that I copied from your post above.  However, I'm having difficulty envisioning how any concern or good idea (that we may have) can make the light of day within PG.  For me, it feels like we have this box sitting before us with the PG label on it.  They are in there, but nobody can figure out how to open the lid to speak with them.  We are told, "oh that is what the FAH Forum is for" or "just use your DAB rep for that stuff".  I think we can all safely say that those two vehicles are not optimal for a variety of reasons that have been shared over and over again.  It's almost like someone needs to crack open the lid and say "hey, there are real donors out here who need to hear from you...yes you, who can actually speak with knowledge and authority". 
 
I think one of the "nails" that keeps that lid shut could be preconceived notions.  Ones like "we can't tell people what is happening because it might just cause more problems".  There are probably a list of them that we could all guess are at work.  The thing is, and anyone that communicates with customers knows this, lack of talking with your base allows them to draw their own conclusions (whether correct or incorrect).  That is what I feel we are seeing happening with PG.  So in the environment as I perceive it, even if we develop some of the greatest ideas for improvement, how do those ideas get (unfiltered and unaltered) to the very people that need to hear them?  I don't see the mechanism myself and the current processes are not working IMO.
 
Alternatively, even if we could communicate with PG, is it like Tobit suggested at the beginning of this thread.  "You can vent to PG non-stop til you are blue in the face but it will not change a thing".  You could substitute "vent" with "communicate" for a more positive spin of the concept.  I don't have the first-hand experience that Tobit seems to have with PG, but I can say, it has felt like that to me for a long time now.  Just thinking out-loud which I think is part of the concept of this thread.

+1 ab. Although makes me wonder about their oversight per my post in the other thread ("...bogarting...")

Lolol!

rjbelans
We have a code of conduct to follow for the DAB. One of the things we must do is keep discussions confidential until such a time as PG agrees to make it public. It's actually a good thing, because some issues could result in much wider arguments that don't need to happen. As DAB representantives, we all have a duty to be fair and let our teams' thoughts and wishes be known. There is probably a lot more common sense approach happening in the DAB than you may think.

In case you guys weren't aware, DAB happens 24/7/365. There are no set meetings being held in a secret lair. Anyone on the DAB can start a thread at any time, and everyone has the freedom to comment as they feel appropriate.

So far, I am impressed by and proud of the members on the DAB for their openness and their abiility to have discussions without letting things get out of hand.

All that being said, we are currently discussing a couple of things, but I cannot comment to you guys about them at this time. There are some good ideas being passed around over there, just like we have here on our forum. Please, try to be patient, we're working together to try to ensure things are done right.

 
Thanks for the update rjbelans!  Good to know you are on top of things and glad you are representing us on the DAB!

rjbelans
Please, try to be patient, we're working together to try to ensure things are done right.

Unfortunately, the gpu3 have not been done right despite what 7im says. Any explanation for how the 762x wus were released in the sorry state they are in?
 

I feel that the DAB process (not the DAB reps) is a poorly designed way to keep us informed.  Why is it that we only hear something when we have risen-up and complained after months (or longer) of no feedback?  I'm not encouraged by what we are hearing here which is basically nothing more than, our lips are sealed and please stay tuned to your local channel.  Is that a good way to treat donors who would like to hear about the progress of outstanding issues that we face in doing this work?  I hardly think so.  Does PG only see "black and white" answers to things or "all or nothing" kinds of communications? 
 
I feel that the continued statement of "we can't tell you anything because it might cause a problem" is a poor answer to donor's needs to be informed.  I understand the concept, but disagree with the conclusion of not communicating at all.  Has PG ever considered the problems that are caused by long periods of time with zero communications to the very people that provide the computing?
 
RJ, I point to an example right here from our own forum.  Xavier posted his thoughts/issues in the "YOUR Thoughts/Ideas/Problems" thread on August 16th.  Here we are 2-months later and that post is unacknowledged, un-aswered, un-anything.  Knowing what you have been told about the "rules of being a DAB rep", I can only guess that you read his post, but cannot answer.  Here's my point.  The no response and silence to issues raised by donors does not encourage us to feel that we have a working DAB process.  I think just about anyone could agree that the "silent treatment" isn't the way to show people that someone is listening and actually seeks input.
 
I'm really not trying to be disrespectful of PG or anything like that.  I'm sure that they are all fine people who are trying to do the best for their projects.  I'm not going to focus on it anymore, so if anyone is offended by my thoughts, there no need to redress them.  I'm going silent about the whole thing because I truly believe nothing will change in this regard and I'm not going to impact it with my thoughts.

Great catch Sticks435!!  Since you found it first, I'd suggest posting your same message in this forum as a new thread.  Some people may be tired of reading this thread and miss this important news.  That is big news for GPU Folders.   

Now we just have to hope and pray it doesn't take months for changes to get pushed out to full F@H. The heat will def be on again... queue up theme from Beverly Hills Cop ;)

gregnrose

I get the feeling PG is not interested in the small folder at all. If you don't have a 4P machine, they just throw you scaps.

 
Well, with the announcement of the new GPU QRB, we know that common misconception over here simply isn't true, despite texinga's continuing rants. 

7 i m

gregnrose
I get the feeling PG is not interested in the small folder at all. If you don't have a 4P machine, they just throw you scaps.

Well, with the announcement of the new GPU QRB, we know that common misconception over here simply isn't true, despite texinga's continuing rants. 

...and you 7im continue to demonstrate why people dislike you so much.  You only hear that which you want to believe and there is apparently no room for any dissenting opinion.  I can only hope that you have finally satisfied your ongoing need to denigrate others, but remember this, I am still one of many Folders who has seen you for what you are and it isn't something to "crow" about.

Didnt Read all the pages, just the Original post.  Im right there with you AB. I have put off GPU upgrades from 480s since this issue came to light. They are about burnt out at this point, LOL. I so want 680 power. But if they don't want my points im going to drop down to SMP only. As I must. My GPUs are frying themselves after 20 million points. 

Should we Notify Pande Labs of our intent to take our Team EVGA Processing and go elsewhere? Crunching or whatever would like to have the power we yield as a collective, Im sure of it.

widsss

My intent is to keep folding. I doubt threats to Pande will help matters. For whatever reason there is a delay in kepler optimization, it's not a conspiracy. Academia doesn't move at the pace some people would like. My opinion is that it's probably a lot more difficult and time consuming than anyone gives credit for.

+100
 
Although other projects running on BOINC have gotten Kepler support quicker, I do believe that folding is different enough to cause more headaches.
 
 
 
 
chrism101,
If you haven't yet, you should read the anouncement from Dr. Pande. There will be new benchmarking and QRB for GPUs which should increase GPU PPD, so in general there is very little, if any, reason to start a boycott.
 
 
Anyone who feels they need to walk away from this project at this time is free to do so. I would only hope that they keep themselves informed of what new developments may come and maybe return to FAH when things are more in line with their expectations.

rjbelans

widsss

My intent is to keep folding. I doubt threats to Pande will help matters. For whatever reason there is a delay in kepler optimization, it's not a conspiracy. Academia doesn't move at the pace some people would like. My opinion is that it's probably a lot more difficult and time consuming than anyone gives credit for.

+100

Although other projects running on BOINC have gotten Kepler support quicker, I do believe that folding is different enough to cause more headaches.




chrism101,
If you haven't yet, you should read the anouncement from Dr. Pande. There will be new benchmarking and QRB for GPUs which should increase GPU PPD, so in general there is very little, if any, reason to start a boycott.


Anyone who feels they need to walk away from this project at this time is free to do so. I would only hope that they keep themselves informed of what new developments may come and maybe return to FAH when things are more in line with their expectations.

*Yellow highlight...
 
This is the consensus. I do not think anyone in this thread has said otherwise. And for anyone to assume anyone said that without asking is disappointing and frankly also demonstrates the lack of looking at this from angles other than their own. Yet when other Nvidia cards came out they had a new CUDA support ready in a reasonable period of time nearly every time. 
 
Yes we read the info from 10-21. That was well after this thread was started. Reality still remains. Until it is released, it is all just BETA or testing with no date in site. 
 
And let's not just focus on  Kelpers... This is a combination of many challenges to this point.
 
My sneaky suspicion... Threads like this are finally getting to those who can make a difference. Whether they agree with a small bit or all if it, it still helps everyone. And that is what matters.
 
Go ahead and dismiss those that do not agree with everyone opinion point by point. Are they not human? Do they not have a voice? Dismissing them like they are of no value dilutes the value in the project. And frankly is an unwelcome comment from a leader.