The current badges are allready for cpu runtime, not points...

I think all it should remain as CPU time like it is now. If you have HT turned on for your i7 then you should get 8 per day. How else could we get a "true" count ... flops ... ... someone would point out that a particular project worked more with ints than floats.

Yes, that's the point exactly.

Go back, read the description of how one gets "badges". The way I read it, means you only get the badge after 90 days of contribution. When using a dual core; if you take and set your preferences to run only one project; then it becomes 90/2 days and not 90.

I thought the badges were for rewarded for the ACTUAL NUMBER OF DAYS you contributed to the project.

We all know it takes 9 months gestation of a fetus before a new little person is introduced to the world. There's no way to have multiple women work concurrently on the project to otherwise expedite the process.

In the case of Dual / Quad core CPU's, these are single chips with 2/4 processors inside of them. It's still only one CPU no matter how you care to slice or dice them, it's only one system. But the computations are such that dual cores get 2 days for participation; and the quads get 4 days participation and it's only one system. Thus, I believe all these systems should only get one day of participation credit regardless how many cores are in them.

Barney, where do you draw the line?

Is hyperthreading like having 2 computers? How about dual cores? Then real dual CPUs? Two entirely separate computers?

If we want to check someone's long-term commitment to the project, we have only to check their join date. If you want true wallclock time, that's the only way to do it. For measuring the exact size of someone's contribution, we have points.

I agree with you, it would be nice if we did have a metric that simply recorded the number of days a member has contributed. But we don't, and can't. Runtime is the best substitute we have.

The badges is like in golf, those that play with a p3 handicap get bronze in 14 CPU days, say 15 calendar days, well reachable and those that run to the shop for I7 get it in a 1/7th, 1/8th of the time. Perfectly fine with me.

As for the badges themselves, maybe diamond markers for 1, 5, 10, 50, 100 CPU years, but are volunteers of that caliber needing such motivations?

... for the larger contributors other things are in development. The CA's had a first in the snail mail about a 10 days ago in reflecting a time related contribution. More is in the works, but think it will be in "print it yourself" type call-off. I'd rather have WCG spend money on project development than cost of paper mail.

Whatever expansion, it should I think not lead to immense programming complexity and maintenance where the stats start taking hours again. Let that room to add more projects instead.

cheers