Make loading a guide from a evo always be an evo .

Case number:671071-1998890
Topic:Game: Other
Opened by:Timo van der Laan
Status:Closed
Type:Suggestion
Opened on:Friday, December 12, 2014 - 16:14
Last modified:Sunday, April 10, 2016 - 10:51

There are real concerns that people are using evo's as a guide in solo.
This is in my humble opinion not something that should be working.
If people say this is not happening then there is no problem blocking this.
Solo solutions should really be solo.

An easy fix to this problem would be, to make a solo immediately go evo if you load a guide from an evo.
This is how I think it should work.

People in groups would still be able to compare their solution to an evo, and work on their saved solo after inspecting the differences but no longer be able to use bands to the guide of the evo.

(Fri, 12/12/2014 - 16:14  |  14 comments)


Angus's picture
User offline. Last seen 2 hours 58 min ago. Offline
Joined: 06/04/2008
Groups: Beta Folders

Absolutely !

Joined: 09/21/2011
Groups: Void Crushers

Not only from evo's but also from saved solutions of someone else. I forgot to include that.

Joined: 06/24/2008
Groups: Void Crushers

This has gone on too long; has been complained about for too long. It should be corrected. A solution is not a solo if a guide is used.

frood66's picture
User offline. Last seen 41 min 43 sec ago. Offline
Joined: 09/20/2011
Groups: Marvin's bunch

I think such a move would be good. Personally I doubt it is nearly as big a deal as some fear....but something has to be done just to put the matter to bed. This is obvious...please ensure that this only applies to shares.

frood66's picture
User offline. Last seen 41 min 44 sec ago. Offline
Joined: 09/20/2011
Groups: Marvin's bunch

by shares I mean shares from other players only.

Susume's picture
User offline. Last seen 1 week 5 days ago. Offline
Joined: 10/02/2011

I agree with this. If another person's save is loaded as a guide, throw the resulting track into evo. Please continue to allow us to load our own solutions as guide, as this is useful for seeing what has changed or what is different between two tracks. The devs may not see this as a priority for the science, but arguments over whether someone has done this keep cropping up and are harmful to the community. This would help to assure people that there is a level playing field for solos, which is important to keep the competitive game fun.

Joined: 08/09/2010

I think this is a waste of time, it is very easy to make -exact- copies of other puzzles, no need to load it as guide. The accusations will exist whenever there are people more concerned about what others are doing than learn to do it better. At the end groups will be asked to disappear :(

Angus's picture
User offline. Last seen 2 hours 58 min ago. Offline
Joined: 06/04/2008
Groups: Beta Folders

I'm naive enough even though I've been here since the beginning to wonder how anyone can make an "-exact- copy" (your words) without loading the source solution either as a guide, or as load it as an an evo and then using script to record enough information about the solution to be able to reproduce it as a new solo.

I think the latter option is forbidden, and eliminating the ability to use a solution as a guide will remove the other temptation.

If someone can simply look at a picture of a solution and copy it -exactly- without any chicanery or assistance, then they deserve their score, and there is nothing that can be done to about it.

spmm's picture
User offline. Last seen 41 weeks 2 days ago. Offline
Joined: 08/05/2010
Groups: Void Crushers

There is an assumption of some kind of fairness in the game and application of personal ethics, well, most of the time, we are all human :)

If I see someone who month after month:
- CONSISTENTLY does not make a reasonably high solo in the early part part of the game, if fact sometimes doesn't even start a solo until their team's solutions have been shared,
- then CONSISTENTLY gets a high evolver score, suggesting that they have spent some time working the evo - i.e. their team's top solos.
- then in the last day(s) of the puzzle their solo score CONSISTENTLY sprints up in the top 10-15 position.

What is a reasonable assumption?

This only works for them when the group the person is in has enough good players to always have a top soloist.

Being concerned about 'what other people are doing' doesn't mean that those individuals are not trying to learn and improve what they are doing.

It does mean they are concerned enough about solution diversity, fairness and all the other players in the game, (especially new players who cotton on and then give up too early because they don't want any part of it) to put up with the name calling and the endless bullying to try to do something about it.

As far as groups go - the groups are totally unbalanced in size and winning because you are in a bigger group doesn't mean much, but that is another conversation.

Joined: 09/24/2012
Groups: Go Science

I agree with spmm that Community rules AND a kind of social control is the only sustainable tool we have to avoid cheating.

Knowing that, as BitSpawn wrote, it's technically possible and relatively "easy" to "exact" copy a shared solution (there is a case in history -- just mentioning that a player was banned for this), probably using various means including scripts. But yes, it is technically possible and I suppose it will ever be so.

There are 2 potential "victims" of such type of cheating:
-the soloists inside group, sharing with their group;
-the open groups, subject to clandestine passengers coming in, loading a solution and going out
(note that a group cheating on other groups is impossible since any share is marked with it's group origin)

I must admit that, in the past, I ever had the impression "our" very top solution in a small open group was copied the latest day by another player. It made me paranoiac, but I cured.

Being in an open group and sharing a lot, I'm still a typical potential "victim" of this.

My feeling today, as a potential victim, is that I'm always free to share or not to share.

Or to join a closed group with only players I trust.

In a paranoiac phase, I could retain sharing anything (including recipes and tips). In an enthusiast phase, I may share everything I created myself.

Conclusion after this philosophic thinkings: I now fully agree with spmm :)

Joined: 09/24/2012
Groups: Go Science

May be this topic could be closed. I think it's all implemented now.

It's now amazing that a soloist can evolve himself (or is it a bug?). O Seki To is currently soloist AND evo on the same puzzle http://fold.it/portal/node/2001404. However, he is the unique player of his team on this puzzle. I suppose it's when taking a guide from himself that he became evolver on one of his own solution. I wonder if this is also possible for a soloist not in group.

It's not very important, but the idea of evolving someone else's solution isn't present here any more. When I am top in a soloist score, it's possible to be low on evolver score because I had no time to further evolve an revolver's solution. This is the game. It would be different if I could evolve myself: the revolver's competition changed rules here doesn't it?

gmn's picture
User offline. Last seen 22 weeks 2 days ago. Offline
Joined: 08/20/2010

Bruno--at AD, we share back any shared solo so that person (or anyone else) can work on evolving it--whether highest team solo or not. Sometimes team members wants to see what others can do to move it along and get some pointers.

Joined: 09/24/2012
Groups: Go Science
Status: Open » Closed

It's implemented.
And going off-line, I can even evolve my own solution if nobody from my team shares back ...

Joined: 09/24/2012
Groups: Go Science

Another tip for "evolving" your own solution:
Take your solution to be evolved, open any other player's solution as "guide".
That's it, you are now in the evolvers race: just evolve it and you get the credits as evolver in case your fellows forgot to share back (=> this saves time for everybody with bad internet connection).

Sitemap

Developed by: UW Center for Game Science, UW Institute for Protein Design, Northeastern University, Vanderbilt University Meiler Lab, UC Davis
Supported by: DARPA, NSF, NIH, HHMI, Amazon, Microsoft, Adobe, RosettaCommons