Kingdom of Fold: The fate of the Players Tabbe

Case number:699969-995796
Opened by:katfish
Opened on:Wednesday, August 21, 2013 - 23:31
Last modified:Friday, November 29, 2013 - 12:38

Once upon a time in the faraway Kingdom of Fold, a great controversy swept the land. The Kingdom's register, known to many as the "Players Tabbe," was set to be changed after many long years of neglect. The nature of this rumored change quickly became a favorite subject of gossip for all citizens from the smallest child to the mightiest knight.

It was decided that the question of the Kingdom's register should be addressed with haste by way of a public debate, and the direction of the Kingdom decided by the people. Representatives from each of the three great territories were chosen, and when a date was agreed upon, citizens caravanned from across the land to the great city of Sieg to witness the historic event.

When all had assembled, the representatives from each territory rose to address the Kingdom.

The first representative, known to many as Evo the Steadfast, professed a desire to list the best collaborators above all others in order to preserve tradition and combat perplexity.

The second representative, called Al the All-encompassing, insisted that the sharpest puzzle breakers achieving the highest ranks in the Overall puzzle category be given the priority.

The third representative, known as Solo of Han, asked that players with a proclivity for independent action be recognized first for their resourcefulness, stating somewhat memorably that ancient traditions are no substitute for a good CPU at one's side.

The last syllables of the debate were spoken, and the crowd quieted to a whisper as friends and neighbors came together to decide the direction of the Kingdom...


Would you prefer the Players navigation tab:
1) Show the current Top Evolvers leaderboard (stay the same).
2) List players based on their performance in the Overall puzzle category.
3) Show the current Top Soloists leaderboard.

(Wed, 08/21/2013 - 23:31  |  24 comments)

Joined: 04/19/2009


Well written!

I would vote for Solo of Han (choice 3) for practical reasons. Often a player just wants to look up another player - and many are not on teams, especially newcomers. In order to do this, you need to click through to the soloist page to enter a name.

Although the categories are interesting, most players IMHO are still looking at the old system of overall rank and still want that to be the priority overall rank. And will remind Al the all-encompassing that his method of tabulation is a more forgiving one than Solo of Han (Al kindly drops puzzles from his reckoning).

I bow to Evo the Steadfast in recognition of our best collaborators... but acknowledge that without a good solo, the evos would be non-existent.

gramps's picture
User offline. Last seen 8 years 12 weeks ago. Offline
Joined: 12/16/2010

1 vote for Choice 3

Will revisit if I ever figure out evo'ing ;-)

Joined: 04/15/2012
Groups: Beta Folders

Good points Auntdeen.

I vote for choice 3 as well.

bertro's picture
User offline. Last seen 1 year 1 week ago. Offline
Joined: 05/02/2011
Groups: Beta Folders

I also choose 3.

And a very nice tale Katfish (because I could see the town crier working here)!

I wish I could write like this.

Angus's picture
User offline. Last seen 4 hours 38 min ago. Offline
Joined: 06/04/2008
Groups: Beta Folders

I would prefer option 4, the all-time solo points rank counting every puzzle from day 1.

spmm's picture
User offline. Last seen 8 weeks 6 days ago. Offline
Joined: 08/05/2010
Groups: Void Crushers

I agree for the reasons stated above that a soloist list should be the default for the Players link.
But which of the soloist lists should be the default and be searchable?

Overall -
is a recent best list, 40 out of the last 50 puzzles and not searchable.

Top Soloists - - searchable and with a calculation system derived by the Druids when Sieg was but a simple village. Only reset every four months(?) or so but does change a bit when each puzzle closes.

Soloists Hall of Fame - - searchable - this is counted from the time when the Fold was new and is a simple addition of points from the first puzzle, hang around long enough, pick up as many points as you can and you may eventually see your name here.

Madde's Master Soloist list - - manually calculated. Translated from the German = 'The achievement Master Soloist shows every solo player who placed in the top 10 in at least 15 puzzles' last updated May 2013. Quality over quantity.

So from my perspective:
Players link - defaults to a Soloist list, the Druidic one is fine. People can check who is hot now in the Overall or category lists.

But I think that 'Master Soloist' is a real indicator of quality folders and it would be great if it could be published automagically by the UW systems who have all of the info and fabulous developers :D Possible not in real time, maybe once a week or so.

Joined: 09/21/2011
Groups: Void Crushers

Nr 3 also, and I like the idea of using Maddes list

Joined: 09/21/2011

me likey madde's list

Joined: 09/24/2012
Groups: Go Science

I would prefer option Nr 5:

An additional ranking mixing soloists and evolvers scores (deleting worst duplicate) for each puzzle.
Hand-folding puzzles are of course included as such.

In puzzle 760: 1.Galaxie 11178 evo (100 pts) / 2. spdenne 11175 solo (98 pts) / 3. spmm 11175 evo (96 pts) / 4. gamiexq 11171 evo (94 pts) / 5. gmn 11169 evo (92 pts) / 6. denbones evo 11168 (90 pts)
/ ... /
12. gitwut 11140 solo (78 pts)
/ ... /
16. auntdeen 11097 solo (71 pts)
/ ... /
221. Patrick Yu 0 solo (1 pt)

Joined: 04/19/2009

This type of a ranking system would be adverse to the goals of Foldit.

First, it would weight team membership to the point where soloists could not remotely compete.

Second, it would cause many players on teams to abandon their own solos in favor of wringing out a couple points from the team highest score. Many folders do not open a puzzle and jump to the top, it can take a few days to have a chance to really work on one. Team players may not bother under a system such as this, going right to evo instead.

Third, it would mean that the team with the highest score would completely dominate the high points if the top soloists aren't rewarded.

Looking above (since you used me as an example), I spent my time and computer resources working on my solo on that puzzle, and placed rank 4 solo (94 points). If a system such as you propose was in place, I likely would have spent the last day or so just grinding out an evo instead.

We are getting many unsolved proteins to work on - and 760 is one of them. We also know that our software is not perfect by any means, we have many CASP results that prove it. My rank 4 solo has almost as much a chance of being close to the native as the number one evo.

This type of system would discourage diversity.

Joined: 09/24/2012
Groups: Go Science

ok auntdeen. If there is no mean to also reward evolvers (it's not so simple to evolve a near to native solution ! I also play entire days to evolve the top ones ! That's why I have no time and clients left to go soloist !), I then also vote for Nr 1 as default player list (keeping other ones). At least, all players are visible there.

Joined: 04/19/2009

@bruno -

Many players put excellent effort into evo, and the best evo players either make an excellent change for the better, or do spend much time (as you do) evoing the native solutions. These are valid and valuable accomplishments!

My read of what katfish has asked above is that the Top Evolver board would still be available (as the Top Soloist board is now), but that the link in the header of the website would bring up the Top Soloist board instead of the Top Evolver one.

katfish's picture
User offline. Last seen 7 years 45 weeks ago. Offline
Joined: 01/09/2013

Just want to hop in here and confirm that the views you see now will still be available. The default view is what's in question.

Joined: 09/24/2012
Groups: Go Science

OOPS sorry. I mean I also prefer option Nr 3 as default, with all players.

(not the current one, I even found it strange to get this one first. I thought this was automatically showed to me because I ranked better in evo than in soloist).

So it seems there is unanimity for Nr3.

I suggest also to merge the 2 lists "Players with photo" and "Players with profile".

Joined: 09/21/2011
Groups: Gargleblasters

I like Option 3. Just as a matter of clarity, the other sorting options will stay there, right?

gmn's picture
User offline. Last seen 2 hours 18 min ago. Offline
Joined: 08/20/2010

Option 3 and keep categories--i like to see what i'm weak in ... uhhh ... areas for improvement

wisky's picture
User offline. Last seen 1 year 47 weeks ago. Offline
Joined: 07/13/2011

Soloists tab (option #3) is my prime choice, but it's easy enough to get there from the current player's tab.

marie_s's picture
User offline. Last seen 2 years 18 weeks ago. Offline
Joined: 05/18/2008
Groups: None

3 also
It should be good, when a native is released, to have the ranking of the players' solution on each puzzle on the protein according to the distance to the native.

katfish's picture
User offline. Last seen 7 years 45 weeks ago. Offline
Joined: 01/09/2013
Status: Open » Closed

Thank you for the feedback, everyone! Much appreciated.

Susume's picture
User offline. Last seen 1 week 1 day ago. Offline
Joined: 10/02/2011
Status: Closed » Open

I prefer option 3.

I also like Marie's idea of ranking people based on similarity to native when it's known, maybe on the puzzle page (top 5 to appear on puzzle page and you can click thru to the whole list). Only for puzzles that have closed.

katfish's picture
User offline. Last seen 7 years 45 weeks ago. Offline
Joined: 01/09/2013
Status: Open » Closed

Thanks for the last comment, Susume. Much appreciated!

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

I suggest it here just to display again the nice Kingdom of Fold's introducing text.

Suggestion: To add a column with the group near the name of the player on Evolver lists.

It's very hard to imagine the co-evolution of groups and evolvers with the information presently displayed. Also, the spirit of evolution is team work. So the group should indirectly be aknowledged there.

spmm's picture
User offline. Last seen 8 weeks 6 days ago. Offline
Joined: 08/05/2010
Groups: Void Crushers

Thanks bruno, I am not aware of any response in receipt of answers to the posed questions.
Whilst players engaged with the post their responses do not appear to have been quantified, and as far as I am aware, there has been no change to the status quo.
Certainly the request for soloists to be the first list to be shown has not been quantified or responded to, although anecdotally this would be a popular choice given that there are may be many strong players who are not members of groups.

spmm's picture
User offline. Last seen 8 weeks 6 days ago. Offline
Joined: 08/05/2010
Groups: Void Crushers

Just a note here, there is a difference between post, save and preview, apologies for my typos in the previous post, standards of editing interfaces vary and it is of course always my responsibility to ensure that I fully understand the quirks of the mechanism with which I engage.


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, Boehringer Ingelheim, RosettaCommons