RE: Team recruiting thread.

Please remove old ad, https://boinc.bakerlab.org/rosetta/forum_thread.php?id=986#10081

(New one posted.)

Thanks much.

---

[email protected]

RE: Team recruiting thread.

Please remove old ad, https://boinc.bakerlab.org/rosetta/forum_thread.php?id=986#10081

(New one posted.)

Thanks much.

Consider it done

---

Moderator9
ROSETTA@home FAQ
Moderator Contact

As a result of a number of requests from the user community for a method of contacting forum Moderators "off forum", I submitted the concept to David Baker for his consideration. His response was to leave it up to the Moderators as to how they wish to handle the matter. Based on my communications with Dr. Baker, each Moderator will have to decide for themselves if they wish to provide off forum communications to the user community.

While I still have some concerns over protecting the privacy rights of users who may wish to use this form of communications, I feel that it is important to provide a mechanism for people to report certain issues in private.

To that end, I have established an email account that will allow off line contact for Moderator9 only. Other Moderators may or may not provide a similar level of contact.

However, before sending mail to that account, it must be clearly understood that the address of the senders account will be revealed. In addition, certain kinds of requests that are sent to the project team, may be forwarded to this account to be handled as a moderation function, and when that happens, it will be necessary to provide contact information to the Moderator so the issue can be addressed.

To send to the account send an e-mail to Rosettamod9 at yahoo dot com (replace the "at" and the "dot" with the correct symbols to properly format the address)

I will try to check this account at least daily.

---

Moderator9
ROSETTA@home FAQ
Moderator Contact

Does the project ever intend to fix these problems, and if so, when?

Two issues have been reported to the R@H project team and subsequently to the BOINC developers in relation to issues brought to our attention here.

1) A bug exists in the forum code that inhibits proper display of the small "X" box in the ratings area for a post that would allow a user to report posts requiring Moderator and/or Administrator attention.
2) A Bug in the forum code that causes a failure of the last post date for a thread to be properly updated when a moderated post is moved to the thread or when a post is edited.

The BOINC developers report that the SETI project has implemented a local repair for the display issue on their forum, and that repair will be included in the next update of the BOINC server baseline forum software.

The date sorting issue will be looked at but it is not considered an issue of high significance by the BOINC developers. If the fix seems easy to implement they will do so, but if it is complex, it will be considered as part of the forum upgrade/rewrite now underway, and planned for deployment at an unspecified time in the future.

The question of providing a direct contact point for Moderators "off forum" was presented to the project administrators. Basically the answer from Dr, Baker is that the Moderators can handle this in whatever way they feel appropriate.

I will not speak for the other Moderators, but I am considering how to go about this so that the users privacy rights are protected while still producing a workable plan. Workable includes providing some way for the project Admins to keep oversight of the moderation function.

---

Proudly Banned from Predictator@Home and now Cosmology@home as well. Added SETI to the list today. Temporary ban only - so need to work harder :)



"You can't fix stupid" (Ron White)

Angus asked-

Does the project ever intend to fix these problems, and if so, when?

The answer to your question was provided in the text you quoted from my original post. I have highlighted the parts you missed-

Two issues have been reported to the R@H project team and subsequently to the BOINC developers in relation to issues brought to our attention here.

1) A bug exists in the forum code that inhibits proper display of the small "X" box in the ratings area for a post that would allow a user to report posts requiring Moderator and/or Administrator attention.
2) A Bug in the forum code that causes a failure of the last post date for a thread to be properly updated when a moderated post is moved to the thread or when a post is edited.

The BOINC developers report that the SETI project has implemented a local repair for the display issue on their forum, and that repair will be included in the next update of the BOINC server baseline forum software.

The date sorting issue will be looked at but it is not considered an issue of high significance by the BOINC developers. If the fix seems easy to implement they will do so, but if it is complex, it will be considered as part of the forum upgrade/rewrite now underway, and planned for deployment at an unspecified time in the future.

The question of providing a direct contact point for Moderators "off forum" was presented to the project administrators. Basically the answer from Dr, Baker is that the Moderators can handle this in whatever way they feel appropriate.

I will not speak for the other Moderators, but I am considering how to go about this so that the users privacy rights are protected while still producing a workable plan. Workable includes providing some way for the project Admins to keep oversight of the moderation function.

So in short the "Project" has no plans to take furthur action on their own on any of these issues. But they will implement the fix when it becomes available as part of the standard BOINC package.

---

Moderator9
ROSETTA@home FAQ
Moderator Contact

The project still has not edited the file to enable the 'x' function to work for those who can see the 'x'.

[color=blue]"This project has not yet defined an administrator to handle this kind of forum reports. [b]Please contact the project and tell them to add this information in their html/project/project.inc file[/b]"[/color]

This is not a bug, it's a failure of the project to properly configure the forum software. I'm contacting and telling.

Angus asked-

Does the project ever intend to fix these problems, and if so, when?

The answer to your question was provided in the text you quoted from my original post. I have highlighted the parts you missed-

Two issues have been reported to the R@H project team and subsequently to the BOINC developers in relation to issues brought to our attention here.

1) A bug exists in the forum code that inhibits proper display of the small "X" box in the ratings area for a post that would allow a user to report posts requiring Moderator and/or Administrator attention.
2) A Bug in the forum code that causes a failure of the last post date for a thread to be properly updated when a moderated post is moved to the thread or when a post is edited.

The BOINC developers report that the SETI project has implemented a local repair for the display issue on their forum, and that repair will be included in the next update of the BOINC server baseline forum software.

The date sorting issue will be looked at but it is not considered an issue of high significance by the BOINC developers. If the fix seems easy to implement they will do so, but if it is complex, it will be considered as part of the forum upgrade/rewrite now underway, and planned for deployment at an unspecified time in the future.

The question of providing a direct contact point for Moderators "off forum" was presented to the project administrators. Basically the answer from Dr, Baker is that the Moderators can handle this in whatever way they feel appropriate.

I will not speak for the other Moderators, but I am considering how to go about this so that the users privacy rights are protected while still producing a workable plan. Workable includes providing some way for the project Admins to keep oversight of the moderation function.

So in short the "Project" has no plans to take furthur action on their own on any of these issues. But they will implement the fix when it becomes available as part of the standard BOINC package.

---

Proudly Banned from Predictator@Home and now Cosmology@home as well. Added SETI to the list today. Temporary ban only - so need to work harder :)



"You can't fix stupid" (Ron White)

Angus Wrote-

The project still has not edited the file to enable the 'x' function to work for those who can see the 'x'.

[color=blue]"This project has not yet defined an administrator to handle this kind of forum reports. [b]Please contact the project and tell them to add this information in their html/project/project.inc file[/b]"[/color]

This is not a bug, it's a failure of the project to properly configure the forum software. I'm contacting and telling.

This aspect of the issue was reported to the project by me twice. They are already aware that the feature is disabled, and I presume they have not activated it for a reason. I do not have the admin rights to activate it myself.

You of course are free to ask them a third time. However, it is not as simple as just turning the feature on. The report has to be sent to someone who has the time and authority to act on the report. While the project staff may have the authority required, based on my communications with them, it is unlikely they have the time.

---

Moderator9
ROSETTA@home FAQ
Moderator Contact

That is decidedly non-responsive on their part. The ONLY avenue available to report an offensive post in confidence is disabled by choice.

Fine - How's this for an example of what is left to the users to publically report what could very well be offensive to some, particularly the younger audiences:

The Mauisun.org team thread in this forum has a discussion of purple penises.

Consider it reported.

Angus Wrote-

The project still has not edited the file to enable the 'x' function to work for those who can see the 'x'.

[color=blue]"This project has not yet defined an administrator to handle this kind of forum reports. [b]Please contact the project and tell them to add this information in their html/project/project.inc file[/b]"[/color]

This is not a bug, it's a failure of the project to properly configure the forum software. I'm contacting and telling.

This aspect of the issue was reported to the project by me twice. They are already aware that the feature is disabled, and I presume they have not activated it for a reason. I do not have the admin rights to activate it myself.

You of course are free to ask them a third time. However, it is not as simple as just turning the feature on. The report has to be sent to someone who has the time and authority to act on the report. While the project staff may have the authority required, based on my communications with them, it is unlikely they have the time.

---

Proudly Banned from Predictator@Home and now Cosmology@home as well. Added SETI to the list today. Temporary ban only - so need to work harder :)



"You can't fix stupid" (Ron White)

That is decidedly non-responsive on their part. The ONLY avenue available to report an offensive post in confidence is disabled by choice. ....

Might I suggest you use the Moderator e-mail box that was set up for just that purpose. The address has been reported on two threads in the cafe forum, and in the FAQs thread in the Number crunching forum. The e-mail account was set up specifically to handle this very kind of reporting. At this time that is the best the project has to offer.

The project has tried to make a number of changes in response to issues presented by the larger user community. But the primary purpose of the Rosetta@home project is the science they are pursuing. The fact is that there is not a large staff of people poised and waiting to handle changes to the project forums, or other details that do not go directly to the science.

Issues such as those you have brought up recently, that require modification of the BOINC baseline package, will only be addressed as the BOINC baseline changes to include them. They will not be addressed at the project level, at least not any time soon. Changes that you might desire, that the project team feels will divert their attention from the science, will be addressed in ways that minimize that diversion. Hence the off line e-mail reporting system for the moderators. While you may feel that this is unfortunate, or that it does not fit your needs, it is just the way it is.

The Project Team is aware of the issues you have raised, including those relating to moderation of the forums. I know this to be a fact because I have reported all of those issues to them. They have decided how they intend to proceed. In light of the totality of the situation, I will have to say again that I am sorry if you find this upsetting, but you have been given the official answers to your questions.

I will take a look at the thread you have highlighted

---

Moderator9
ROSETTA@home FAQ
Moderator Contact

Mod9........

perhaps it would help if you included the contact email address in your signature line

example:

__________
Moderator9

contact me at.... Rosettamod9 at yahoo dot com (replace the "at" and the "dot" with the correct symbols to properly format the address)

---

Vavega Wrote-

Mod9........

perhaps it would help if you included the contact email address in your signature line

example:

__________
Moderator9

contact me at.... Rosettamod9 at yahoo dot com (replace the "at" and the "dot" with the correct symbols to properly format the address)

I thought of that too. I know you have been following all this for the last few weeks, and I think you would agree that availability of the information is not the underlying issue in this case. That said I may do just what you have suggested. I am still not totally convinced that people will be happy having to reveal a return address to use that form of contact, no matter what assurances I or the Project team offer that the information will not be misused.

In any case here it is again - To contact me off line send an e-mail to.... Rosettamod9 at yahoo dot com
(replace the "at" and the "dot" with the correct symbols to properly format the address)

---

Moderator9
ROSETTA@home FAQ
Moderator Contact

So it appears that the project principals have totally abandoned all responsibility for the forums, giving it away completely to the volunteer moderators.

You must have missed the "in confidence" part of my post. You yourself pointed out that reporting posts by email to non-project personnel (volunteer moderators) reveals the personal email addresses. I don't care to have emails to non-project people as my method of reporting, so no - I will not take your suggestion.

How much time canit possibly take to edit one parameter in one config file to assign a project moderator to take some responsibility as the reporting recipient for their forum?

That is decidedly non-responsive on their part. The ONLY avenue available to report an offensive post in confidence is disabled by choice. ....

---

Proudly Banned from Predictator@Home and now Cosmology@home as well. Added SETI to the list today. Temporary ban only - so need to work harder :)



"You can't fix stupid" (Ron White)

Angus asked: (edited for brevity)
[quote]...How much time canit possibly take to edit one parameter in one config file to assign a project moderator to take some responsibility as the reporting recipient for their forum?

[quote]

Have you considered offering to do the code changes for them? Or tried to use the system they have put in place to see if it will work?

If you want to report something, either of those options would be a far more productive approach than continuing to proceed on the path you have chosen. The time to perform the edit you describe might in fact be short, however you have clearly illustrated the point that dealing with the resulting contacts will not. I think it is becoming increasingly apparent why the Project Team might have decided to pass this function off to the Moderators.

---

Moderator9
ROSETTA@home FAQ
Moderator Contact

Angus asked: (edited for brevity)
[quote]...How much time canit possibly take to edit one parameter in one config file to assign a project moderator to take some responsibility as the reporting recipient for their forum?

[quote]

Have you considered offering to do the code changes for them? Or tried to use the system they have put in place to see if it will work?

If you want to report something, either of those options would be a far more productive approach than continuing to proceed on the path you have chosen. The time to perform the edit you describe might in fact be short, however you have clearly illustrated the point that dealing with the resulting contacts will not. I think it is becoming increasingly apparent why the Project Team might have decided to pass this function off to the Moderators.

Sure ! I can drive there in 20 minutes (no kidding) and add a project contact to their forum config file. Think they'll let me in the door?

If the change had been made right away when it was first reported, this conversation would not have had to drag on... I have reported one obscene username by email to D Kim, and now the obscene posts in another thread. That probably would have been the extent of my drain on the reporting system. But now it has escalated into a big deal, where it could have been fixed months ago with no further fuss.

---

Proudly Banned from Predictator@Home and now Cosmology@home as well. Added SETI to the list today. Temporary ban only - so need to work harder :)



"You can't fix stupid" (Ron White)

Vavega Wrote-

Mod9........

perhaps it would help if you included the contact email address in your signature line

example:

__________
Moderator9

contact me at.... Rosettamod9 at yahoo dot com (replace the "at" and the "dot" with the correct symbols to properly format the address)

I thought of that too. I know you have been following all this for the last few weeks, and I think you would agree that availability of the information is not the underlying issue in this case. That said I may do just what you have suggested. I am still not totally convinced that people will be happy having to reveal a return address to use that form of contact, no matter what assurances I or the Project team offer that the information will not be misused.

In any case here it is again - To contact me off line send an e-mail to.... Rosettamod9 at yahoo dot com
(replace the "at" and the "dot" with the correct symbols to properly format the address)

FYI: Many people run with images, avatars and signatures turned off, so nothing in there is ever guaranteed to be seen.

---

Proudly Banned from Predictator@Home and now Cosmology@home as well. Added SETI to the list today. Temporary ban only - so need to work harder :)



"You can't fix stupid" (Ron White)

could ya make it any bigger!??

all joking aside, i do believe a smaller font and plain black would be more in keeping with your personality and demeanor as a moderator.

i think that anyone who is savvy enough to willingly run rosetta on their machine(s) will be willing to give up a spam email address, after all they trust to register with one. especially as they know it will afford them the luxury of whining sorry...whinging about something or other.....wouldn't you agree?

---

Vavega wrote-

could ya make it any bigger!??

all joking aside, i do believe a smaller font and plain black would be more in keeping with your personality and demeanor as a moderator.

i think that anyone who is savvy enough to willingly run rosetta on their machine(s) will be willing to give up a spam email address, after all they trust to register with one. especially as they know it will afford them the luxury of whining sorry...whinging about something or other.....wouldn't you agree?

Well ok. Maybe 20 point text was a bit over the top, but you have to admit it was hard to miss. You are correct that smaller is better. Your point about the e-mail address is well taken. Moreover, the reporting function we have been discussing while confidential, is not anonymous. When the designated person receives the report, he/she also knows precisely who made the report and how to contact them. So except for the fact that the e-mail report would be an off project function, it is a difference without a distinction. I think that is the reason the project decided to handle it this way.

I would also have to agree that e-mail contact has problems both ways. While the user may feel some risk, clearly the Moderator is also allowing a much higher level of personal access as well. That is why the project left it up to each Moderator to decide if they wanted to participate in that form of reporting. I put your suggestion for this to the project and set it up because I felt it was a reasonable extension of the Moderators job description. But I cannot speak for others on this point, and if others do not adopt the premise that is their choice. The project has in fact established a system every bit as good as the official BOINC reporting system.

As an aside I would add that your contributions and suggestions have been constructive and helpful. While i took the opportunity to poke some fun on this occasion, that in no way diminishes the fact that I do value the input. I have had one problem with the "red text" suggestion. While I obviously agree that it was a good idea, I have had one user who is red color blind tell me he cannot see the text. After that I tested this with a friend who has the same problem, and while he could not see the COLOR in the text it did appear as grey scale to his eye. So I have continued to use the suggestion. Any of the primary colors would suffer from this problem for someone.

---

Moderator9
ROSETTA@home FAQ
Moderator Contact

Angus wrote -

Angus asked: (edited for brevity)
[quote]...How much time canit possibly take to edit one parameter in one config file to assign a project moderator to take some responsibility as the reporting recipient for their forum?

[quote]

Have you considered offering to do the code changes for them? Or tried to use the system they have put in place to see if it will work?

If you want to report something, either of those options would be a far more productive approach than continuing to proceed on the path you have chosen. The time to perform the edit you describe might in fact be short, however you have clearly illustrated the point that dealing with the resulting contacts will not. I think it is becoming increasingly apparent why the Project Team might have decided to pass this function off to the Moderators.

Sure ! I can drive there in 20 minutes (no kidding) and add a project contact to their forum config file. Think they'll let me in the door?

If the change had been made right away when it was first reported, this conversation would not have had to drag on... I have reported one obscene username by email to D Kim, and now the obscene posts in another thread. That probably would have been the extent of my drain on the reporting system. But now it has escalated into a big deal, where it could have been fixed months ago with no further fuss.

Perhaps you are unaware that you can provide this service to the project from your computer at home. There is no need for you to drive anywhere or be involved in a confrontation at anyones door. All you have to do is offer to fix the problem, and if they take you up on the offer they can give you the rights you need to do the repair. Now I have no idea if they will do that at the level you may require to implement the fix, but they have provided various accesses for those of us trying to help solve the work unit failure issues.

As for spending a lot of time talking about the issue, that has not been my choice or the choice of the project. This is a situation where we can "DO" or "TEACH" your choice has been teach, what is your pleasure?

I have presented your issues to the project team, as I am certain you must have by now your self. They have taken a decision as to how they will handle it. I have reported the decision back to you, and implemented the proposed solution. You are seemingly unhappy with the decision they have made, and have elected to persue the messenger. Since the entire discussion has been available for over 36,000 users to comment on, and the vast majority remain silent, I can only conclude that this may only be a problem for a handful of users, only one of whom continues to take issue with the proposed solutions. Clearly the project has reached a similar conclusion. So it is no mystery to me why the project may not see it as a significant problem, that remains unaddressed.

---

Moderator9
ROSETTA@home FAQ
Moderator Contact

So except for the fact that the e-mail report would be an off project function, it is a difference without a distinction.

There is one important distinction:

The project people already have access to personal information. The users have to accept that when they register for the project.

We do NOT, however, have to release that personal information to outside moderators.

There still remains only two avenues of contact outside of public posts - a) contact the project principals by email or b) contact one outside-of-the-project moderator by email

---

Proudly Banned from Predictator@Home and now Cosmology@home as well. Added SETI to the list today. Temporary ban only - so need to work harder :)



"You can't fix stupid" (Ron White)

Moderator9:
Perhaps you are unaware that you can provide this service to the project from your computer at home. There is no need for you to drive anywhere or be involved in a confrontation at anyones door. All you have to do is offer to fix the problem, and if they take you up on the offer they can give you the rights you need to do the repair. Now I have no idea if they will do that at the level you may require to implement the fix, but they have provided various accesses for those of us trying to help solve the work unit failure issues.

I'm fully aware of methods and capable of doing things remotely. However, since I'm an IT professional in a large server site, I naturally assumed that it would be easier to address it in person rather than having the project set up a VPN or similar access path for a trivial change. I also was not contemplating a confrontation, but a reasonable belief that outsiders might not be allowed in secure lab locations on the UW campus. I've worked on that campus.

As for spending a lot of time talking about the issue, that has not been my choice or the choice of the project. This is a situation where we can "DO" or "TEACH" your choice has been teach, what is your pleasure?

I offered - have they responded directly to my very specific offer? Apparently not.

I have presented your issues to the project team, as I am certain you must have by now your self.

Only on the forum, except for the singular report to David Kim.

They have taken a decision as to how they will handle it. I have reported the decision back to you, and implemented the proposed solution. You are seemingly unhappy with the decision they have made, and have elected to persue the messenger.

Pursuing the unresolved issue with the forum, not attacking the messanger. You put yourself in the middle, so you have to expect to be the two-way conduit on this issue.

Since the entire discussion has been available for over 36,000 users to comment on, and the vast majority remain silent, I can only conclude that this may only be a problem for a handful of users, only one of whom continues to take issue with the proposed solutions. Clearly the project has reached a similar conclusion. So it is no mystery to me why the project may not see it as a significant problem, that remains unaddressed.

Maybe they don't see a reason for a bunch of "me too" psots.

---

Proudly Banned from Predictator@Home and now Cosmology@home as well. Added SETI to the list today. Temporary ban only - so need to work harder :)



"You can't fix stupid" (Ron White)