We already have a method of sharing. If a soloist wants to evo he/she can join or create a group. There is no need for a ghost group for people to hop in and out of. It's an obscene gaming of the current group system and undermines it.
Bruno… you should only be in one group. Your clone shouldn't have another group. But, with your group hopping you don't seem to have any concept of team loyalty. I believe your intentions are good, but, the result is divisive.
You are correct that this change in play will effect group play. I'm for the closing of the soloists virtual group. We don't need a ghost group that will eventually have number one score consistently if the idea takes off. Might as well kill off all group play and have only soloists evo'ing each others.
The idea isn't workable unless you want to kill current group system in the long run.
Would someone please remind us how the group scores are derived please?
I did look on the wiki but it doesn't say much beyond stating that groups can get better scores by evolving.
There are 2 different discussions here.
The group for sharing and evolving is under discussion, not created yet before more advices. Moreover, I will not create it myself.
The Soloist Virtual Group has a completely other meaning. No sharing are there allowed in the group rules. it's only a reference point for scoring, without any contact between players unless via global chats or PMs.
I'm personally only in one group and I strictly respect the agreements made before to join any group (closed or open), and this for the long term (for example, never sharing recipes from other authors to new groups without their agreement).
I used a not playing clone only to be able to create the Virtual Group. I don't connect with this clone, and there is nothing to share, to load or to use in this virtual group. As a player, I'm not able to join the Virtual group, because I'm already member of another group.
I'll close the Virtual Group if the community decides so.
For the time being, it's an experiment. I'm in favour of keeping it alive sufficient time to be able to evaluate it. Personally, I find it challenging for my own group, and also interesting to see if a sum of individuals can compete with teams (I believe that real teams are potentially stronger than a sum of individuals).
Your virtual group is screwing with the group scores and rankings.
Having a group made up of players from other groups or soloists who drop in and out constantly is disruptive and against the spirit of group play and competition.
I strongly suggest that this be stopped immediately, and the group be disbanded and all points deleted.
As far as I remember, group scores are calculated following this formula:
Points = Max(1, RoundUp( ( 1 - (Rank - 1)/(NumGroups - 1) )^5 * X))
This formula gives the number of points that each group will earn at the end of a puzzle, based on their rank when the puzzle closes. These rank points are distinct from and not directly related to Score points.
The link with the current topic:
-Any additional group (either "groups for sharing" or the controversial Soloists Virtual Group) will help top groups (rank 2 to n) to get relatively more points. At the limit, if there are as many groups as players, rank 1 will get 100, 2 will get 99 etc. If there are only 2 groups, rank 1 gets 100 pts, rank 2 gets 0.
-A potential "top group" (like Soloists Virtual Group, or any ad hoc group created by conjunctural top soloists) will have 2 potential effects on the overall group ranking. If it's n°1, no change in the ranking of the regular groups. If it's n°2 to n-1, it will discriminate the groups ranked before or after. The discrimination will be bigger if there are few groups in the competition.
Exemple for puzzle 882: Soloist virtual group was n°6 with a maximal cost for n°7, L'alliance Francophone (with a loss of 8 pts). All other groups after l'Alliance Francophone loose less than 8 pts.
I notice the strong opposition of several top group members, even asking for an urgent closing of the Soloists virtual group. Of course, I can personally close this group immediately, following an emerging rule that no (even not playing) clone should be allowed to created a group.
But this would not solve the potential of any other player creating such a group (even staying there as an administrator). That means that no pure soloist can create a group (if you create a group, you are obliged to be member of this group, otherwise, the group disappears). No group as the Soloist virtual group might appear. The only means for soloists to experiment evolving or even temporarily compete with groups is to join a group or to create a new group. My experience with the Soloist virtual group (aiming on experimenting the power of a sum of soloists against organized groups) becomes prohibited. A freedom opportunity is closed. May be for the good of the game? The main idea beeing that ad hoc groups "for pure soloists" endanger the social structure of the game.
Before to close the Soloist virtual group (AND let any player re-creating a similar group !), I would like to know the opinion of other players (also soloists or members of low ranking groups) on the following questions. Please do not answer the question unless you have read the Soloist virtual group rules here(it's a group without sharing).
The questions:
1) Should there be restrictions in the creation of groups? (to be whriten in the overall Foldit rules), for example "No group should be created by non playing clones? Clones are only admitted for IRC chat purposes"(even if existing anti-cheating rules are respected).
2) Should there be overall rules against the creation of groups aimed to help soloists go in and go out in order to experiment what they want.
3) or "No group should be created that could be perceived as an anti-groups group. Players have the choice to be pure soloists or pure members of a group, not both."
4) additionally "Members of a group are morally obliged to a minimum share and chat in this group. Groups are no list of pure soloists and should be deleted if the team spirit disappears".
My personal answer ot the 4 questions are:
1) I don't know (waiting for more arguments)
2) No
3) No
4) No
I am really perplexed, and see no benefit at all to a 'Virtual Soloists Group", but do see potential negatives.
The original concept of a group was for the ability of other players to be able to take someone else's solution and improve it. This has worked more or less well for years. What did not work, from the developer's point of view, was the "All Hands" puzzles, when solo scores were shared with all players (all that happened was that the highest solo score got beat to death).
We already have a reward system in place for soloists who choose not to belong to a group - the global Soloist rankings. I know, no matter where his score shows up, that johnmitch can outfold me any day of the week!
Many of us have asked over the years that the primary Players tab be redirected to the Soloists page rather than the Evolver's page, but the devs have refused to do that. Perhaps it's past time now for them to acknowledge that there would be no Evolver scores without a great Solo score to work with - and yes, there are many times when a Soloist can take the top score on a puzzle, higher than any group.
IMHO, there is no reason to create a ghost group for soloists to join, post and leave. It directly opposes the developer's rational for groups, games the system - and has no benefit for anyone in the community.
All groups are open to new members, especially during CASP season. Most groups aren't looking for the "best" players - many are simply looking for congenial teammates. If you aren't a member of a group, and wish to join one - send the manager a foldit message to ask!
If anyone would like to create a functioning new group, please do so! The team system, as it is now, is the best method for learning and sharing your knowledge. The Black Belt Folding videos were an attempt to try to spread knowledge across the entire community, but there is no substitute yet for true teamwork.
@BRUNO - wherever you are coming from, you would have to agree with those last statements - you have been a member of 3 groups so far, I assume to try to learn what you can from them.
Rather than creating a ghost group for a top player like johnmitch to jump in & out of, the community would be so much better off if johnmitch either joined a group or created his own - then, at least a few players would be able to benefit from learning from him. That's so much healthier for the game than some functional groups being pushed down in rank by a ghost group that no one can learn from.
Again, @ Bruno… perhaps it would be better if you looked at these questions instead: Is it good for the community as a whole? Why skirt around technicalities to do something unless it has great benefit to the community? The devs are extremely busy with CASP right now - is this the right time to game the system to force Foldit to rewrite some rules that you think need to be clarified?
IMHO - delete the ghost group and wait until after CASP to mess around by inserting your personal vision, when everyone has more time to evaluate.
ok auntdeen,
Thanks to have the advice of a veteran with community thinking.
I'd have preferred to wait for more advice from players with no personal or group ranking possible interest conflict, but I simply do not resist more to the pressure.
I'm not convinced concerning the soloist group, but I'm convinced that fighting is not ideal for fun, may be not for the community. And certainly, fighting and being insulted with terms like "loyalty" or questions against my motivations is certainly not good for my health neither my reputation as a real person with a real name. Neither for the fun (but I'll stay playing here for science, yes).
I'll delete the soloist group asap (without notice to johnmitch, it's not fair, sorry), but I keep this discussion for later (after CASP). I learned enough with this experience. OK let's fold in peace.