CEP2: wasted time, energy, hardware resources, and finally ... wasted volunteer's good will !
Yves

The script to 'credit' the 'not the volunteers machine's fault' to my contributions does not run continuously. Same as with the 'too late'. These take outs are set aside and reviewed as and when.

Cleanenergy mentioned an imminently monthly conference call where he'd put another specific discussion point up, the server status page. No word back at all is no good, tests the patience, but is it truly our worry? Yes and no. It's so easy to mod the validator rules and we'd and much more importantly, the scientists be nothing the wiser, so these errors being spat out is better i'd think till they can put the finger on the weak point. Individually we can make out choice to help ferret these issues out, or move to a science which does only a fail 1:1000, and then still a post is made to say 'my machine is rock solid, how come'. Me too , but do research the forums first if the issue was already being reported and how often.

My 2 vatus

20:19 04th Sept - _0 sent out
20:20 04th Sept - _1 sent out
20:28 04th Sept - _1 returns as error
20:33 04th Sept - _2 sent out
12:06 05th Sept - _0 returned
07:23 13th Sept - _2 returned
Assume disagreement and both _0 and _2 put into pending verificaion.
07:24 13th Sept - _3 sent out
15:06 13th Sept - _3 returned
Results then assigned as valid / invalid

The allocation of points follows some rules which are not always clear. I am not an expert but the following is my understanding:
The simplest and most usual method is to average the two claims.
If the validator considers one claim to be 'out of normal' then it uses the other claim.
CEP2 has an extra rule which only allows claims for work completed.
My assumption is that the valid work units both failed in job 0 so do not claim much while the invalid work unit ran for a long time (over 15 hours) through to job 6 or job 7 and made a high claim.
As _2 is invalid it received half its claim.
_0 is considered 'out of normal' so _3 claim is used.

There's always some that will jump in that credits/points are subordinate, yet it is the first if not second most frequently discussed issue on these forums as source of irritation. Credit/points actually is the base of calculating of how much computing power you are contributing, where time is just time, even if you attach an atari running 24/24.

The asking/claim is pretty fake. It's what the servers compute based on a number of statistical averages for the project and your device performance benchmark. Say latter weighs in 20 percent of the total 'claim'. Read somewhere it was supposed to be removed altogether. Then you get to see 68.5 only, for using 10 times as much resources as a faah job does. Never been able to wrap my head around that.