EVE Search - Project Discovery - Changes to the scoring system

Check My IP Information

All Channels

Upcoming Feature and Change Feedback Center

Project Discovery - Changes to the scoring system

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 2 3 4 :: [one page]

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 4 post(s)

CCP Wonderboy C C P C C P Alliance 10	Posted - 2016.03.21 11:18:58 - [1] - Quote Hello scientists! The Project Discovery team is extremely satisfied and impressed with Capsuleer interest for this scientific endeavor, you have been doing a great job so far! However, in order to reduce the exploitability of the feature, we, in collaboration with MMOS and the HPA, have decided to stop calculating Accuracy Rating for the community consensus. Instead, we will increase the rate of training examples you get, for which you get an immediate rating. This is only the first step in our attempt to improve Project Discovery and it's data quality, as we might introduce further changes to our scoring procedure. This change will also significantly reduce the heavy load on the MMOS servers and should ensure a smoother experience for everyone. Feel free to leave any feedback and suggestions here, and may the cytoplasm be with you. - CCP Wonderboy

Ralph King-Griffin Devils Rejects 666 The Devil's Warrior Alliance 14823	Posted - 2016.03.21 11:24:54 - [2] - Quote thank you for this change, now begone with you ye cytoplasm whoures! Better the Devil you know. =]\|[=
Yadaryon Vondawn Art Of Explosions 404 Hole Not Found 101	Posted - 2016.03.21 11:53:26 - [3] - Quote Excellent change! Could you also take a look at the presentation of example/training samples? In the in-game channel we noticed that for some reason every single control image is now Nucleus or Nucleoli. This skews accuracy heavily because they are easily recognized. They seem to be mostly in the 300-500 range. This is also tied to another request which I am sure you already have on the table, remove the sample number in the lower right corner. Only show it after one presses submit because people now know that they are control images and will thus vote in a specific way. Also since this morning the PD servers have been stable as anything. No problems whatsoever. Keep up the good work o7

CCP Wonderboy C C P C C P Alliance 11	Posted - 2016.03.21 11:58:23 - [4] - Quote Yadaryon Vondawn wrote: Excellent change! Could you also take a look at the presentation of example/training samples? In the in-game channel we noticed that for some reason every single control image is now Nucleus or Nucleoli. This skews accuracy heavily because they are easily recognized. They seem to be mostly in the 300-500 range. This is for MMOS to decide, i'll forward this to them to see if they can mix things up a little. Yadaryon Vondawn wrote: This is also tied to another request which I am sure you already have on the table, remove the sample number in the lower right corner. Only show it after one presses submit because people now know that they are control images and will thus vote in a specific way. This is already implemented and should roll out soon(tm).

Mynxee Signal Cartel EvE-Scout Enclave 269	Posted - 2016.03.21 13:29:41 - [5] - Quote Good changes! <3 Lost in space, looking for sigs... Blog: Cloaky Wanderer
Lasse R Farnsworth Blue Republic RvB - BLUE Republic 21	Posted - 2016.03.21 17:26:59 - [6] - Quote +1 :) Nice to see that stuff going in the game. Actually having such a fast response to reports is a nice change of pace.
Circumstantial Evidence 265	Posted - 2016.03.21 19:29:04 - [7] - Quote Keep up the good works! And please keep watching the "March Update feedback thread" where numerous suggestions have been made since the feature became available to all players.
Joia Crenca Science and Trade Institute Caldari State 278	Posted - 2016.03.21 23:46:53 - [8] - Quote Thank you for this change! And thanks for letting us be a part of this project! Now... about future rewards... my favorite ship doesn't look very much like a promised pony...
Nevyn Auscent Broke Sauce 3103	Posted - 2016.03.22 00:46:36 - [9] - Quote Some people seem to still be getting their rating affected by community consensus. Are old slides still going to affect rating as they get processed?
Beta Maoye 110	Posted - 2016.03.22 02:27:01 - [10] - Quote Good to stop calculating accuracy rating for the community consensus. Will I still see the percentages of community consensus? I think knowing what other people's choices is still an interesting feedback to players.

Barrogh Habalu Imperial Shipment Amarr Empire 1107	Posted - 2016.03.22 09:05:06 - [11] - Quote Good change. Not only because of intended effects, but also because sometimes you really need a few more training examples to check yourself and filter out misconceptions. I also hole that some of the samples will be reviewed by HPA in the future, re-calculating accuracy in the process and enabling better sorting of out results. Future of T3 cruisers - multi-tool they aspired to be instead of sledgehammer they have become
Keta Min Delicious Entropy 0	Posted - 2016.03.22 09:14:07 - [12] - Quote CCP Wonderboy wrote: However, in order to reduce the exploitability of the feature, we, in collaboration with MMOS and the HPA, have decided to stop calculating Accuracy Rating for the community consensus. This is a problematic change. Now the people who are trying to game the system have no incentive to even try to be correct on the samples that don't affect accuracy. Instead of clicking cytoplasm they can now basically click anything at all.
Vardec Crom The Harpooner's Rest 9	Posted - 2016.03.22 23:58:38 - [13] - Quote Keta Min wrote: CCP Wonderboy wrote: However, in order to reduce the exploitability of the feature, we, in collaboration with MMOS and the HPA, have decided to stop calculating Accuracy Rating for the community consensus. This is a problematic change. Now the people who are trying to game the system have no incentive to even try to be correct on the samples that don't affect accuracy. Instead of clicking cytoplasm they can now basically click anything at all. How will they know which ones don't affect accuracy?
Nevyn Auscent Broke Sauce 3103	Posted - 2016.03.23 00:33:04 - [14] - Quote CCP Wonderboy wrote: Hello scientists! The Project Discovery team is extremely satisfied and impressed with Capsuleer interest for this scientific endeavor, you have been doing a great job so far! However, in order to reduce the exploitability of the feature, we, in collaboration with MMOS and the HPA, have decided to stop calculating Accuracy Rating for the community consensus. Instead, we will increase the rate of training examples you get, for which you get an immediate rating. This is only the first step in our attempt to improve Project Discovery and it's data quality, as we might introduce further changes to our scoring procedure. This change will also significantly reduce the heavy load on the MMOS servers and should ensure a smoother experience for everyone. Feel free to leave any feedback and suggestions here, and may the cytoplasm be with you. - CCP Wonderboy Something is going funky with this Wonderboy, since I'm showing rating loss still happening despite getting every test sample right. Can you please check you haven't coded every non test sample with a small downwards rating or something, because that's exactly what I'm currently seeing, and it's rather disheartening.
Keta Min Delicious Entropy 0	Posted - 2016.03.23 10:01:37 - [15] - Quote Vardec Crom wrote: Keta Min wrote: CCP Wonderboy wrote: However, in order to reduce the exploitability of the feature, we, in collaboration with MMOS and the HPA, have decided to stop calculating Accuracy Rating for the community consensus. This is a problematic change. Now the people who are trying to game the system have no incentive to even try to be correct on the samples that don't affect accuracy. Instead of clicking cytoplasm they can now basically click anything at all. How will they know which ones don't affect accuracy? Right now the sample number is a hint. Apart from that, the control samples tend to be really clear and obvious, as opposed to the vast majority of the normal samples.
Yadaryon Vondawn Art Of Explosions 404 Hole Not Found 101	Posted - 2016.03.23 11:48:13 - [16] - Quote The bug that gave only Nucleoli and Nucleus control samples seem to be fixed now :)
ACESsiggy CajunWaffle 47	Posted - 2016.03.23 13:50:20 - [17] - Quote Be cool if the images loaded without having to wait 1 minute and the transmission errors for submission. Hopefully this update addressed these problems as well. GÇ£The open-minded see the truth in different things: the narrow-minded see only the differences.GÇ¥

CCP Wonderboy C C P C C P Alliance 22	Posted - 2016.03.23 13:55:06 - [18] - Quote ACESsiggy wrote: Be cool if the images loaded without having to wait 1 minute and the transmission errors for submission. Hopefully this update addressed these problems as well. We should see significant performance increases with this next release. :)

ACESsiggy CajunWaffle 47	Posted - 2016.03.23 14:22:15 - [19] - Quote CCP Wonderboy wrote: ACESsiggy wrote: Be cool if the images loaded without having to wait 1 minute and the transmission errors for submission. Hopefully this update addressed these problems as well. We should see significant performance increases with this next release. :) Sweetness... I can finally work toward getting that combat armor suit :) GÇ£The open-minded see the truth in different things: the narrow-minded see only the differences.GÇ¥
Murkar Omaristos The Alabaster Albatross Sev3rance 240	Posted - 2016.03.23 16:53:02 - [20] - Quote CCP Wonderboy wrote: Hello scientists! Feel free to leave any feedback and suggestions here, and may the cytoplasm be with you. omg. may the cytoplasm be with you

Vincent Athena V.I.C.E. 3792	Posted - 2016.03.23 17:13:44 - [21] - Quote Suggestion: Tie this feature into the "flying spaceships" part of the game. Method: At data and Relic sites, add the loot item "Special biological sample". If you have a Special biological sample in your hold or hangar when you do Project Discovery, you get the option of "Analyze special sample". If you do so, you get more Kredit and ISK. The actual samples you see are the same ones we all see, you just get more reward. If you do not want to do Project Discovery, and have some Special biological samples, you can sell them on the market (which means they need a market slot.) Know a Frozen fan? Check this out Frozen fanfiction
Jadzeer DAXX Carbide Wine and Beer Industries 6	Posted - 2016.03.23 17:23:22 - [22] - Quote Can CCP poke HPA and get them to add bigger hamsters to the PD server. It keeps crashing, lagging etc and it's frustrating.
Jaden Noah Imperial Dreams Curatores Veritatis Alliance 9	Posted - 2016.03.23 17:31:52 - [23] - Quote I may have missed it, but is there somewhere that we can see how to exchange the kredits? Can the kredit store be linked on the PD page?
Mars Aspen Watchtower Bible and Tract Society 0	Posted - 2016.03.23 17:34:37 - [24] - Quote This seems to me like a really bad idea. It is crude and simplistic. Control examples are so obvious and they are always of only one type. It takes very little learning to match up a control example with a reference example. So you can select any old rubbish if the slide is remotely challenging, having more than one type, and wait for the single control examples to come along. Hey presto, you can score almost as well as a really good analyst who plays with integrity. There is now no reward for trying to work through a more complex slide because you believe in the project and the gameplay is severely compromised too. Surely you can do better than this.
Jadzeer DAXX Carbide Wine and Beer Industries 6	Posted - 2016.03.23 17:36:26 - [25] - Quote Jaden Noah wrote: I may have missed it, but is there somewhere that we can see how to exchange the kredits? Can the kredit store be linked on the PD page? You can buy stuff using AK in the SOE LP stores.
Maldiro Selkurk CHEMO IMMUNO RESISTANT VIRUS X 544	Posted - 2016.03.23 18:00:55 - [26] - Quote Ive played for hours and hours but im horrible at this aspect of the game (27% accuracy). I dont really understand what this change is or what it is intended t do. Can anyone reword the change in hopes i can grasp what exactly this change is supposed to fix. Thanks, Maldiro Yawn,-á I'm right as usual. The predictability kinda gets boring really.
Demica Diaz SE-1 265	Posted - 2016.03.23 18:03:07 - [27] - Quote Good news and good news on more boost to servers. Its getting bit frustrating that every 3rd picture you spent time on is "lost" . Also with speed of Kredit gain with higher rank can we have secound labcoat that is mostly white like most SoE "theme" usually is? :D
AgentMaster Platinum Octopus Infernal Octopus 3	Posted - 2016.03.23 19:05:55 - [28] - Quote CCP Wonderboy wrote: Hello scientists! The Project Discovery team is extremely satisfied and impressed with Capsuleer interest for this scientific endeavor, you have been doing a great job so far! However, in order to reduce the exploitability of the feature, we, in collaboration with MMOS and the HPA, have decided to stop calculating Accuracy Rating for the community consensus. Instead, we will increase the rate of training examples you get, for which you get an immediate rating. This is only the first step in our attempt to improve Project Discovery and it's data quality, as we might introduce further changes to our scoring procedure. This change will also significantly reduce the heavy load on the MMOS servers and should ensure a smoother experience for everyone. Feel free to leave any feedback and suggestions here, and may the cytoplasm be with you. - CCP Wonderboy EDIT: This change should roll out at 15:00 UTC, keep in mind this is only a change to the MMOS API so we expect no downtime. The Project Discovery client will be updated after Easter vacations. Tell me what you do to prevent the arbitrary choice of answers? Some results evident that they have no resemblance to those examples For example: https://i.gyazo.com/3723c762d0c9a531e35d604e08395b6b.png Do not you think that such responses more harm than science help? No matter what answer you give - always get isks?! Ppl is lazy - why they need to lose a time to think - just click and get isk :( how else to explain the absurd answers with high rates of choice?! Blessed is the man who has nothing to say and yet silent!
Memphis Baas 1366	Posted - 2016.03.23 19:58:43 - [29] - Quote That 77% cytoplasm choice seems to reflect how badly we're metagaming the system, despite all the praise that we're doing a good job. Clearly one way for people to achieve 99% accuracy is to go through the samples as fast as possible and record the consensus for each sample number, then go through again with an alt and answer "correctly." Good changes so far. I'd like to see the following: - It looks like you've reduced the history drop-down list to only the last 6 samples, which kinda sucks. Can you please increase it to 20? We do more than 6 submissions per day. - For the submissions that are rated negative (lowered accuracy) for by the Project Discovery people, can you implement an option so we can click on that negative rating and get the "results" slide back, so we can see the slide and what we picked wrong? I realize it's a bit of work, and possibly increased server load, to get particular slides re-downloaded, but I'd like to see what I did wrong, or at least what I picked (that was wrong). We learn from our mistakes, if the feedback is provided. - If the above is not possible, at least compile some more detailed accuracy statistics as feedback: for example, if the screen were to tell me "You're 90% accurate in the nucleus category but only 40% in the cell body category" I'd try to improve in that area. - EVE has a web browser and Project Discovery has a website with more examples, would you put a link to that into the Project Discovery interface? Not sure if people realize that there are more example slides out there that they could be looking at, through the in-game web browser.
NorthCrossroad EVE University Ivy League 97	Posted - 2016.03.23 20:10:03 - [30] - Quote Seems like a good improvement. If possible, would be great, if latest samples that reached consensus, would be marked in different color in history. AND user would be able to see the actual result of that concensus. Perhaps, even with a possibility for a resercher to leave a note in some very unusual cases. North

Leorajev Aubaris Blue Goat Ltd. 23	Posted - 2016.03.23 20:15:40 - [31] - Quote Jadzeer DAXX wrote: You can buy stuff using AK in the SOE LP stores. Either it's not working for me or it's not true. I see no such thing when I open the LP store in a SOE station.
Beta Maoye 110	Posted - 2016.03.23 21:04:58 - [32] - Quote Mars Aspen wrote: This seems to me like a really bad idea. It is crude and simplistic. Control examples are so obvious and they are always of only one type. It takes very little learning to match up a control example with a reference example. So you can select any old rubbish if the slide is remotely challenging, having more than one type, and wait for the single control examples to come along. Hey presto, you can score almost as well as a really good analyst who plays with integrity. There is now no reward for trying to work through a more complex slide because you believe in the project. The gameplay is severely compromised too. Surely you can do better than this. I understand they have to find a balance of methodology between a game and a science project. They want to make sure that the game is interesting so that people will play it. Too much negative feedback is not interesting for most players and discourage players to play the game. On the other hand, they want most players can spend time and effort to pick the right answer so that the database can be as accurate as possible. Too simple control slides allow people to game the system and corrupt the database. Now the control slides are concentrated in low number slides and mostly single-answer. They can randomize the numbering of control slides or hide the slide number and reveal it with the result. They can make more challenging control slides that requires 2-3 choices. Even better if they can scale up the difficulty of control slides corresponding to player's ranking. In that way, the mechanic will still be challenging while keeping it interesting as a gameplay.
Memphis Baas 1367	Posted - 2016.03.23 21:35:52 - [33] - Quote You guys do remember that game players aren't looking for interesting or challenging, right? Cause if it were so, the NPCs would whoop our asses, and the PVP'ers would fight each other rather than trying to kill industrials and freighters. Players are looking for progression and winning, which is why CCP is having these issues with people gaming the system. Bottom line, it's not really a game, but it's presented as one. So people are going to play to win. However, I don't have to be logical or achieve anything in a game; I can go shoot the station sentry guns over and over and over, each time in a new Ibis, if that's how I want to play EVE.
Circumstantial Evidence 265	Posted - 2016.03.23 21:58:36 - [34] - Quote Leorajev Aubaris wrote: Jadzeer DAXX wrote: You can buy stuff using AK in the SOE LP stores. ~~Either it's not working for me or it's not true. I see no such thing when I open the LP store in a SOE station.~~ Found it, scrolling way down... This is a small problem I noted in the "March update feedback" thread. UI could be improved to help players find where to redeem AK, a special button and/or AK filter in SoE stations for the LP UI screen could help.
Diana Crow Fox Industries and Exploration 1	Posted - 2016.03.23 22:03:46 - [35] - Quote @CCP Wonderboy Any plans on setting the maximum accuracy rating to 100% ? Because, 99% being the maximum right now and getting 99 Experience Points and 99.000 ISK per submission (at level 100), it seems to me, like someone messed up the calculation behind all this.
Beta Maoye 110	Posted - 2016.03.23 22:16:15 - [36] - Quote The purpose of PD is to utilize the huge brain power of players in massive multiplayer game to solve science problems that require the comprehensive power of human intelligence rather than raw computing power. It has to be presented as a game. CCP knows it is not about how solid and scientific a mechanic can be. It is how players feel about the game that matter. They know they have to provide incentives rather than hard facts to player in order to exchange for their problem-solving human power. CCP's expertise in gaming is much better than a science project team.
Jaden Noah Imperial Dreams Curatores Veritatis Alliance 9	Posted - 2016.03.24 00:10:13 - [37] - Quote http://prntscr.com/aj6cjc This happens too much and is NOT right. There is obvious cell-to-cell variations in these and they count it wrong!
Spaminator Caldari Provisions Caldari State 11	Posted - 2016.03.24 02:46:35 - [38] - Quote Meaningful activity- fun to participate. Thanks for the updates. I would still like to be able to stretch the window to full window resolution. Even if it gets a bit blurry- this would help us 'large monitor folks' see things better....and improve our accuracy. -Spaminator
Darsch Pugs State War Academy Caldari State 0	Posted - 2016.03.24 05:41:36 - [39] - Quote Murkar Omaristos wrote: CCP Wonderboy wrote: Hello scientists! Feel free to leave any feedback and suggestions here, and may the cytoplasm be with you. omg. may the cytoplasm be with you If only he had said May the mitochondria be with you. Mitochondria. Eve. Mitochondria eve. Parasite eve!
Morgan Agrivar Peace.Keepers 302	Posted - 2016.03.24 06:18:33 - [40] - Quote As a scientist, I would like to thank CCP for corroborating with scientific researchers to further ourselves in this project. Being a member of the Chromosome 19 program for the Human Genome Project, I am thankful that you brought this to members of the gaming community in order to help further science. Thanks! Morgan o/ This would cure me of the fear...

Demica Diaz SE-1 269	Posted - 2016.03.24 10:18:39 - [41] - Quote What did I not noticed in this one? I am confused
Leorajev Aubaris Blue Goat Ltd. 23	Posted - 2016.03.24 11:08:09 - [42] - Quote CCP Wonderboy wrote: Hello scientists! However, in order to reduce the exploitability of the feature, we, in collaboration with MMOS and the HPA, have decided to stop calculating Accuracy Rating for the community consensus. Instead, we will increase the rate of training examples you get, for which you get an immediate rating. - CCP Wonderboy The rate of training examples should be loweredGÇª I got 2 immediately after another and overall I feel like its to often anyways. Thanks. PS: It would be really nice to see how all the samples that were rated by me were categorized finally. Don't know if it's possible, but it would help to really get a feel how those things are rated by the experts.
AMARR CITIZEN 11151215 Viziam Amarr Empire 1	Posted - 2016.03.24 13:44:29 - [43] - Quote i love this portion of the game, but whenever you add incentive, you add incentive to cut corners and cheat. i know spend the vast majority of my time, if i am not running a fleet for 4's, solving these. because i am new to protein identification, every problem takes me a very long time. upwards of 20 minutes. you REALLY have to look closely to see if what your looking at is cellular variation, or if it happens to be caused by variations in something i dont understand, like differences in space. i also see mitochondria EVERYWHERE! after getting it wrong twice, im sure ill come across it someday! the majority of people can/will/do not have the time or patience to dedicate 20-30 minutes to properly identifying something, if they are just beginning to learn it. in fact, in missions chat and corp chat, when i asked for advice, i was simply told "just check cytoplasm, eventually youll get level 10". that, to me, was heartbreaking. it showed that those people had no appreciation for what they were participating in, and even worse, were purposefully providing false examples for the possibility of intangible recreational electronic fiscal advancement. when you motivate someone to do something, with profit, you motivate them to do it in the most profitable way, regardless of repercussions or consequences. in reality, the best thing ccp could do would be remove all incentives, and leave it to only the people who want to contribute in honesty and appropriateness. of course, then very few people would participate, but all the results would be reliable, and would actually contribute to this project. as is right now, the main thing i see to be contributed thus far, is a bunch of quick, rapid, multiple "guesses" by people who dont care about the possible damage they may be doing, or complications they may be causing, to something that is actually very serious and important. if anything, after i get better at identifying these, accurately and quickly, i will probably move to the website so the information i submit is actually analyzed and respected, instead of being lost in a meta data bank of what is mainly people "clicking for isk, not information". seeing some of the "community census", was very disappointing people of earth... this is why you cant have nice things My posts are here for me to cite when debating in chat, or as a record to devs should they wish or require them. With rare exception, i do not monitor, or reply to posts. please take this in consideration, reply sparingly, cite your answer. thanks
Akira Kata Goggles Inc. 5	Posted - 2016.03.24 16:08:14 - [44] - Quote Vincent Athena wrote: Suggestion: Tie this feature into the "flying spaceships" part of the game. Method: At data and Relic sites, add the loot item "Special biological sample". If you have a Special biological sample in your hold or hangar when you do Project Discovery, you get the option of "Analyze special sample". If you do so, you get more Kredit and ISK. The actual samples you see are the same ones we all see, you just get more reward. If you do not want to do Project Discovery, and have some Special biological samples, you can sell them on the market (which means they need a market slot.) This is a great idea!
Mars Aspen Watchtower Bible and Tract Society 0	Posted - 2016.03.24 17:07:37 - [45] - Quote Jaden Noah wrote: http://prntscr.com/aj6cjc This happens too much and is NOT right. There is obvious cell-to-cell variations in these and they count it wrong! One would have to look at a green-only view to be able to tell
Chroniccandy 420 nul-li-fy I N F A M O U S 20	Posted - 2016.03.24 19:05:18 - [46] - Quote I personally dont like project discovery. I think its wack. I guess i fail to see the fun. Owell Its a miss for me.
Drago Shouna Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire 310	Posted - 2016.03.24 20:54:58 - [47] - Quote Jaden Noah wrote: http://prntscr.com/aj6cjc This happens too much and is NOT right. There is obvious cell-to-cell variations in these and they count it wrong! I fully agree with you, I have looked at samples, analysed it, picked where it should go. Only to be told it's wrong, even though it doesn't look remotely like the answer they say it should be, some couldn't look more wrong. I'm not sure if it's a programming error or what, but it's bloody annoying.
Nevyn Auscent Broke Sauce 3105	Posted - 2016.03.24 23:59:56 - [48] - Quote Drago Shouna wrote: I fully agree with you, I have looked at samples, analysed it, picked where it should go. Only to be told it's wrong, even though it doesn't look remotely like the answer they say it should be, some couldn't look more wrong. I'm not sure if it's a programming error or what, but it's bloody annoying. More cell to cell variations has a bad example and should only be picked when half the cells have a stained nucleus and the other half don't, rather than simply a bit of brightness intensity change. I was making that mistake and E-mailed HPA about it and asked why and they said they classify it a little differently and have used their classification on the test samples. Though picking it on the community samples does let them know to look for things. I haven't come across a single wrong test slide though, some I'd disagree with like one that had Cytoplasm+other stuff, and I didn't feel there was enough green for cyto, but I could see there was some green, so now I know another look it can have and will be able to give better answers to the other slides.
Lillik Eoner Merchants Trade Consortium The Last Chancers. 0	Posted - 2016.03.25 00:18:48 - [49] - Quote CCP Wonderboy wrote: This is only the first step in our attempt to improve Project Discovery and it's data quality, as we might introduce further changes to our scoring procedure. This change will also significantly reduce the heavy load on the MMOS servers and should ensure a smoother experience for everyone. CCP Wonderboy needs to learn how to spell. Should be "its". /lesson
Shallanna Yassavi Imperial Academy Amarr Empire 98	Posted - 2016.03.25 01:12:38 - [50] - Quote Most of the test slides are pretty obvious. As we see more samples account-wide, it should show us trickier and messier tests. A signature :o

Raven Dallacort Pandemic Horde Inc. Pandemic Horde 0	Posted - 2016.03.25 01:29:32 - [51] - Quote I'm no scientist, but how am I wrong on this?
Limp Biscuit University of Caille Gallente Federation 0	Posted - 2016.03.25 03:06:34 - [52] - Quote I'd like to be able to have the chance to review the full slide after my input has been selected, and rated. Most of the time, I can only see the portion that I locked in and selected after my input has been made, thereby not allowing me to further analyze what would have been a better choice to make, based upon consensus. To have the ability to re-examine what I was looking at, and have the correct answer displayed would be beneficial for after-study.
Maia Pallas BlackBongWater 0	Posted - 2016.03.25 04:34:14 - [53] - Quote consensus wins again: http://imgur.com/fVuUqjH
Pleasure Hub Node-514 Pleasure Hub Hotline 48	Posted - 2016.03.25 05:17:20 - [54] - Quote Keta Min wrote: Vardec Crom wrote: Keta Min wrote: CCP Wonderboy wrote: However, in order to reduce the exploitability of the feature, we, in collaboration with MMOS and the HPA, have decided to stop calculating Accuracy Rating for the community consensus. This is a problematic change. Now the people who are trying to game the system have no incentive to even try to be correct on the samples that don't affect accuracy. Instead of clicking cytoplasm they can now basically click anything at all. How will they know which ones don't affect accuracy? Right now the sample number is a hint. Apart from that, the control samples tend to be really clear and obvious, as opposed to the vast majority of the normal samples. Remove the sample number for starters then. I don't mind if the control samples are easy/moderate difficulty, it doesn't pay to be overly punishing to players that want to participate. *'One night hauler'* The tell all story of a pleasure bot in Jita 4-4
Gantian Freelancer Union Unaffiliated 0	Posted - 2016.03.25 06:25:50 - [55] - Quote I'd suggest having a look at players' past results, and use that to determine which types of samples most players are getting wrong. I would then modify and expand the descriptions in order to clarify the situation in future. Like many ppl are split over whether it's Cytoplasm or Vesicles often Also, 4 examples per category simply isn't enough - make it 8 and include 'unusual' examples maybe? I appreciate it's a work in progress, but there's room for improvement. Fantastic idea though...
Geronimo McVain McVain's Minning and Exploration Inc 19	Posted - 2016.03.25 15:25:29 - [56] - Quote What I would love is that the examples react to the filter choices. So that you see what the examples would look with just blue or green. It would help clarifying difficult decisions.
La Ahri Project Tetragrammaton 6	Posted - 2016.03.25 15:32:39 - [57] - Quote I find this change questionable at best. It's really simple to just click random answers for everything except test questions (10000000XXX) and hit 90% accuracy in 3 hours or so. I expect your results quality to get much worse in nearest future.
Moondo The Moomins The Unthinkables 0	Posted - 2016.03.25 16:39:43 - [58] - Quote Mars Aspen wrote: This seems to me like a really bad idea. It is crude and simplistic. Control examples are so obvious and Agree. It's still fairly easy to game the system for high accuracy. Mars Aspen wrote: they are always of only one type. Not true. It seems like you start to get 2-hex control samples around 85% accuracy
Moondo The Moomins The Unthinkables 0	Posted - 2016.03.25 16:44:54 - [59] - Quote [quote=Vincent Athena]Suggestion: Tie this feature into the "flying spaceships" part of the game. Method: At data and Relic sites, add the loot item "Special biological sample". If you have a Special biological sample in your hold or hangar when you do Project Discovery, you get the option of "Analyze special sample". If you do so, you get more Kredit and ISK. The actual samples you see are the same ones we all see, you just get more reward. If you do not want to do Project Discovery, and have some Special biological samples, you can sell them on the market (which means they need a market slot.)[/quote Give that man a cookie!!!! Great idea!!
Terraj Oknatis xX-Crusader-Xx Tactical Narcotics Team 44	Posted - 2016.03.26 00:23:08 - [60] - Quote Well thank God its not may the midichlorians be with you. That would just be silly.

Memphis Baas 1370	Posted - 2016.03.26 01:37:20 - [61] - Quote Accuracy now seems to be similar to gaining standings, what you get depends on how close to 100 you are (with diminishing returns). Which is ok. We're still doing this, though, which I found hilarious.
Wimzy Chent-Shi Unkindness Incorporated Who Dares Wins. 48	Posted - 2016.03.26 09:23:56 - [62] - Quote Well I am just sad I missed out on the cytoplasm freefarm that has been practiced before. I feel somewhat demotivated since 90% of my input is essentially randomly irrelevant to my gain. And even when I put in the effort and try to identify the correct thing, I get to find out that scientist or whoever responsible for the control sample had a different idea. I started humbly at 50% working towards 85% in the end. I also observed that over 50% of the non-control sample qualify for Unspecific, but nobody checks those, because you risk losing the accuracy rating, cause control samples might look like many things, but well, they have the holy truth in them for some reason. If I were to have a personal statistic of where had I most frequently gone wrong between two options, let's say Microtubule organizing center vs Centrosome (yey silly me), I would probably pick options based on statics instead of my observations. I came here in peace to find tears and misguided hatred. I don't mind to make my spaghetti little salty.
Memphis Baas 1370	Posted - 2016.03.26 13:16:52 - [63] - Quote Ideas: 1. We can write notes on other pilots' Show Info pages, to keep track of behavior. If you're not doing so already, CCP, start keeping track of the choices each character makes for Project Discovery, so you can easily differentiate between those who pick cytoplasm 99% of the time, and those who seem to pick whatever choices seem appropriate. You can build all sorts of statistics from this, including how "unusual" each choice is when it's made. 2. Project Rediscovery: the option to go through the samples again, but with the consensus visible, to agree or disagree with the consensus. For high accuracy players, or if you can somehow detect those of us who are actually trying to be accurate rather than to game the system. 3. The samples can be categorized: - 1 or more choices at 100% - maybe these can be reviewed and converted into practice / accuracy slides, since we ALL seem to agree on the choices - 1 or more choices at 50% - 90% - there's some sort of consensus - 0 choices at 50%, but more than 8 choices at less than 20% - there's complete disagreement - something is confusing about the sample; maybe some of these can be reviewed and published on the website as contrast examples, or explanations on how to get the answer via elimination. - not yet rated - you can keep a tally so you can see our progress.
Typhoon Maru Angelic Shadows 0	Posted - 2016.03.26 13:35:38 - [64] - Quote I know it's a bit nit picky and asking for the moon on a stick , but it would be nice if we could examine the Option pictures using the magnifier and the colour filters. That said i'm enjoying this project immensely keep up the good work
Nam Dnilb Universal Frog 256	Posted - 2016.03.26 14:18:30 - [65] - Quote Typhoon Maru wrote: I know it's a bit nit picky and asking for the moon on a stick , but it would be nice if we could examine the Option pictures using the magnifier and the colour filters. That said i'm enjoying this project immensely keep up the good work The above and unlock the image controls on the result screen please. Right now it a bit of "You, Sir, were wrong and you'll never know why!"
NorthCrossroad EVE University Ivy League 97	Posted - 2016.03.26 17:40:28 - [66] - Quote Just have to say it - female Sister of EVE armor is HOT. :) Best "clothing" ever. Though would be great to have incentives after 75k AK. Like Sister of EVE ships skins at 100k+ for example. North
Mars Aspen Watchtower Bible and Tract Society 0	Posted - 2016.03.26 18:01:05 - [67] - Quote Raven Dallacort wrote: I'm no scientist, but how am I wrong on this? I would guess that since the blue is quite strong the underlying green is weak, so the strongest green signal is as indicated. Just imo though.
Wimzy Chent-Shi Unkindness Incorporated Who Dares Wins. 49	Posted - 2016.03.26 18:43:17 - [68] - Quote NorthCrossroad wrote: Just have to say it - female Sister of EVE armor is HOT. :) Best "clothing" ever. Though would be great to have incentives after 75k AK. Like Sister of EVE ships skins at 100k+ for example. North This. The armor now stands for "not dealing in project discovery again" :-D although, if not purchased over a contract somewhere it also stands for a decent standard of accuracy and skill which should/could be further motivated by further rewards. I came here in peace to find tears and misguided hatred. I don't mind to make my spaghetti little salty.
Nevyn Auscent Broke Sauce 3115	Posted - 2016.03.26 18:47:32 - [69] - Quote Mars Aspen wrote: Raven Dallacort wrote: I'm no scientist, but how am I wrong on this? I would guess that since the blue is quite strong the underlying green is weak, so the strongest green signal is as indicated. Just imo though. The splotchy uneven sized nature of the green is a good sign of nuclear speckles rather than Nucleoli. Those two can be one of the hardest to tell apart.
Pycu BRUTAL GENESIS GaNg BaNg TeAm 0	Posted - 2016.03.27 08:51:38 - [70] - Quote CCP Wonderboy wrote: . Instead, we will increase the rate of training examples you get, for which you get an immediate rating. Not sure if it's a bug or not but I have observed a not so rare case where my choice is the only correct one, marked with green etc. but my rating is not increasing when I submit it. If the Submission history was working I was going to be able to provide an example. Any ideas?

The Golden Serpent Order of Jamyl 150	Posted - 2016.03.27 10:11:17 - [71] - Quote I have been really impressed with the whole Project Discovery thing and if anything will make me resub this would be it, as it feels like I'm actually doing something real.
Alexhandr Shkarov Swamphole Inc. Swamphole 25	Posted - 2016.03.27 10:51:47 - [72] - Quote Feedback: Since our accuracy rating is based on the pre-selected samples, could you please for the love of everything that you believe in add a box which explains WHY you want something specific if we have it wrong? I've had some images which could be two things but they claim I saw it wrong and needed to choose the other. It would be amazing if there was some explanation on why they see it that way, so that we can learn more about the process and be more accurate on other samples. All my posts are on my personal title and should not be confused as me speaking for anyone else.
Memphis Baas 1375	Posted - 2016.03.27 13:45:07 - [73] - Quote Give them a couple weeks and then switch to "no more Project Discovery until they fix it" mode. Nothing more damaging than a rewards system that's unfair or that rewards wrong choices.
NorthCrossroad EVE University Ivy League 97	Posted - 2016.03.28 17:36:05 - [74] - Quote Another small thing. Would be great, if hovering over the Project Discovery button on the Neocom would show the amount of AKs in your "wallet". Just like when you hover over the Wallet button. North
Arsine Mayhem Tribal Liberation Force Minmatar Republic 400	Posted - 2016.03.28 18:31:31 - [75] - Quote I just got around to trying this out, went part way through the tutorial. One thing. How are we suppose to find the impairment in a cell when we have no good cell to reference. Doesn't seem to realistic. Am I missing something?
Black Snapper Pator Tech School Minmatar Republic 0	Posted - 2016.03.28 23:28:27 - [76] - Quote Why oh why is my submission history always empty. Im at level 17 and have been doing this for 3 days...
Memphis Baas 1394	Posted - 2016.03.29 18:17:04 - [77] - Quote The submission history is empty for everyone; they removed that functionality. We used to get rated by the Project Discovery people and that's how our accuracy increased; now the system automatically rates your accuracy by giving you the tutorial slides all over again and if you guess them correctly your accuracy goes up, otherwise it goes down. So the submission history no longer matters.
SurrenderMonkey Space Llama Industries 2219	Posted - 2016.03.30 14:49:04 - [78] - Quote This is a good change, however, I feel like the training samples need to be harder. A lot harder. I can actually predict, with pretty close to perfect accuracy (exceptions are, e.g., microtubules, where the unknown samples are usually pretty obvious, too), whether or not a sample will be a training sample just by its appearance. They're pretty much always much "cleaner" and less ambiguous than the unknown samples. While this has suppressed the motivation to click-cytoplasm-because-everyone-else-probably-did-too, I don't think a high accuracy score on the existing training samples is representative of ability on the unknowns. "Help, I'm bored with missions!" http://swiftandbitter.com/eve/wtd/
Drake Carver Minmatar Deep Space Expeditionary Corp 0	Posted - 2016.03.30 16:04:20 - [79] - Quote TL:DR >>This post is one big sloppy thank you for this wonderful game. Skip to the end for the actual question. From the beginning I have supported project discovery for its purpose and a fascination with the microscopic world. From my experience so far I find it disheartening that the system can and will be gamed however I am certain methods will arise and adapt to optimize for the best results for the hardworking researchers that will actually make use of the results to refine our knowledge to be less of a guessing game in whatever we MMO player assist in. Now I may be sorely mistaken in the things I am about to suggest but there are some functions that I feel would at least allow serious project discovery players to get a little more satisfaction from a job well done. I often find that sometimes I have made an obvious mistake only after checking all the marks. If there could be a way to report that I am truly mistaken in my result so that I cannot knowingly skew the results I would be thankful. I would still gladly accept the consequences of reductions in accuracy or the nullification of any gains I would have stood to earn. Letting obviously bad results through does not feel right and if I could make reparations I would. TL:DR >>Can there be a button for reporting that a mistake has been made but it was realized only after submitting.
Terminal Insanity Pwn 'N Play SpaceMonkey's Alliance 931	Posted - 2016.03.30 20:45:09 - [80] - Quote This is a really neat addition to the game. I wonder if you could expand this to include other science projects as well? a massive real science lab in eve! "War declarations are never officially considered griefing and are not a bannable offense, and it has been repeatedly stated by the developers that the possibility for non-consensual PvP is an intended feature." - CCP

Memphis Baas 1399	Posted - 2016.03.31 00:22:17 - [81] - Quote SurrenderMonkey wrote: This is a good change, however, I feel like the training samples need to be harder. A lot harder. I can actually predict, with pretty close to perfect accuracy (exceptions are, e.g., microtubules, where the unknown samples are usually pretty obvious, too), whether or not a sample will be a training sample just by its appearance. I disagree. First, it's a game, let people get enjoyment from seeing their accuracy increase and their rewards increase. Because the rewards are crap anyway, so going from 50k to 100k is still pretty crappy. Second, how would you feel with your confidence of "perfect accuracy" but only 50% in the score at the top of the screen? At 25 slides per level, anyone reaching level 40 has done 1000 slides, and should be a freaking expert. Third and last, if they make them a lot harder I will screenshot all of them and then reference the image and "guess" correctly next time. Thus, making the slides harder just reinforces the wrong kind of gameplay. I don't want to learn more subcellular morphology than it's already been presented or than I know from general knowledge. Project Discovery isn't easy, and we're working for free, so make it harder and a lot of people will just stop working. Because EVE is a game, not work.
Beta Maoye 113	Posted - 2016.03.31 02:52:38 - [82] - Quote Memphis Baas wrote: Third and last, if they make them a lot harder I will screenshot all of them and then reference the image and "guess" correctly next time. Thus, making the slides harder just reinforces the wrong kind of gameplay. Sooner or later, according to the tradition of Eve, someone will post a full list of answers to known samples on the web.
SurrenderMonkey Space Llama Industries 2219	Posted - 2016.03.31 14:50:58 - [83] - Quote Memphis Baas wrote: SurrenderMonkey wrote: This is a good change, however, I feel like the training samples need to be harder. A lot harder. I can actually predict, with pretty close to perfect accuracy (exceptions are, e.g., microtubules, where the unknown samples are usually pretty obvious, too), whether or not a sample will be a training sample just by its appearance. I disagree. First, it's a game, let people get enjoyment from seeing their accuracy increase and their rewards increase. Because the rewards are crap anyway, so going from 50k to 100k is still pretty crappy. Second, how would you feel with your confidence of "perfect accuracy" but only 50% in the score at the top of the screen? At 25 slides per level, anyone reaching level 40 has done 1000 slides, and should be a freaking expert. Third and last, if they make them a lot harder I will screenshot all of them and then reference the image and "guess" correctly next time. Thus, making the slides harder just reinforces the wrong kind of gameplay. I don't want to learn more subcellular morphology than it's already been presented or than I know from general knowledge. Project Discovery isn't easy, and we're working for free, so make it harder and a lot of people will just stop working. Because EVE is a game, not work. I don't have perfect accuracy - what I said is that I can predict whether or not a given image is a training sample with close to perfect accuracy. They're invariably highly precise examples of their given type. Visually, they stick out like a sore thumb. Consequently, they don't do a particularly good job of training the player to identify the comparatively "noisy" unknown samples. I'm not saying they should be harder for any balance related reason - I'm saying they need to be more closely representative of the samples we're actually trying to identify to serve any effective purpose. "Help, I'm bored with missions!" http://swiftandbitter.com/eve/wtd/
Memphis Baas 1401	Posted - 2016.03.31 22:31:02 - [84] - Quote I agree in principle with that, but they have to make sure that the example slides contain only the single cell feature that they're exemplifying. Blur and distort all you want, but if the example for plasma membrane shows a cell with plasma membrane and cytoplasm, then we'll mis-grade all the normal samples based on how the green appears in the example slide, cytoplasm included. Because we don't really know microbiology. Golgi strands look a little like mitochondria strands, and the single sentence of text explaining each of them doesn't really stress just how critical it is to note if the squiggles are spread out through the cell or only in the vicinity of the nucleus (actually touching it). To me it's more important that the example slides function as good examples, than it is that they function as an accurate scoring mechanism. They can just get rid of the accuracy score altogether and just give everyone 99k xp every slide, it's not like that would make any difference. Might even convince some more people to try some slides.
Lugh Crow-Slave 2172	Posted - 2016.04.16 21:25:58 - [85] - Quote Can we get examples of what something isn't to go along with what something is Citadel worm hole tax
Shallanna Yassavi Imperial Academy Amarr Empire 148	Posted - 2016.04.25 01:52:29 - [86] - Quote Memphis Baas wrote: SurrenderMonkey wrote: This is a good change, however, I feel like the training samples need to be harder. A lot harder. I can actually predict, with pretty close to perfect accuracy (exceptions are, e.g., microtubules, where the unknown samples are usually pretty obvious, too), whether or not a sample will be a training sample just by its appearance. I disagree. First, it's a game, let people get enjoyment from seeing their accuracy increase and their rewards increase. Because the rewards are crap anyway, so going from 50k to 100k is still pretty crappy. Second, how would you feel with your confidence of "perfect accuracy" but only 50% in the score at the top of the screen? At 25 slides per level, anyone reaching level 40 has done 1000 slides, and should be a freaking expert. Third and last, if they make them a lot harder I will screenshot all of them and then reference the image and "guess" correctly next time. Thus, making the slides harder just reinforces the wrong kind of gameplay. I don't want to learn more subcellular morphology than it's already been presented or than I know from general knowledge. Project Discovery isn't easy, and we're working for free, so make it harder and a lot of people will just stop working. Because EVE is a game, not work. Discovery isn't a game, though. We're actually telling researchers what their microscope looked at in the lab, and they're probably going to use those results develop medicines and diagnose tricky diseases based on the data we give them. The higher the quality of results we give, the better they can do exactly that. What makes it feel like a game is how we get shinies and boosters from it, and how it "keeps score." With the accuracy system the way it is, it's not all that difficult to game, because most of the test slides are pretty obvious. Some of them aren't obvious, and some of the obvious ones claim they weren't test samples. A signature :o
Memphis Baas 1476	Posted - 2016.04.25 22:20:22 - [87] - Quote Shallanna Yassavi wrote: Discovery isn't a game, though. We're actually telling researchers what their microscope looked at in the lab, and they're probably going to use those results develop medicines and diagnose tricky diseases based on the data we give them. It is a game because it's not a job, and it's not a job because we don't get paid with RL money. So they asked a bunch of gamers to click some buttons inside our preferred game, and they are giving no feedback after you've clicked. Sounds like an EVE minigame to me, much like archeology or mining. It's a game because: - you have to start up the EVE game client to access PD. - you get ISK and item rewards from it. - we can "game" the choices if we want to. - there are no repercussions (What if everyone clicking cytoplasm results in the "future medicine" being a carcinogen, for example? Are they going to arrest any of us?). - there are no supervisors and there is no peer review. - there is no pay. You want everyone to be serious and treat PD like a serious research project. Maybe that's what they want, too. Or maybe, they get better results if 50,000 people click it like a game, than if only 50 click it seriously and everyone else says "screw it, this is no fun, let's shoot some ships."
Tanya Anatolia Minerva's Ward 0	Posted - 2016.04.27 16:16:36 - [88] - Quote Skimmed through a good share of this thread, but with good reason, I have a personal gripe about a bad slide. Normally I'm fine with one that's a little grey zone or hard to classify, and I admit I've gotten my fair share wrong, but this one got right in my craw: http://imgur.com/M3YioIz I see two instances of a cytokinetic bridge and one instance of a lactin filament, but it's classified as intermediate filaments. My accuracy score took a huge hit from that one, and I take pride in my accuracy score. It's low-effort ISK and a chance at a shiny lab coat, so I'm still "satisfied" but this particular slide took a saki bowl worth of wine and some complaining in corp chat before I felt better about it.
Moondo The Moomins The Unthinkables 4	Posted - 2016.04.28 01:54:01 - [89] - Quote Really, PD??? http://imgur.com/a/KH5W7 REALLY??!!?!?!?

HPA Illuminator The Human Protein Atlas 29	Posted - 2016.04.29 13:38:42 - [90] - Quote Tanya Anatolia wrote: Skimmed through a good share of this thread, but with good reason, I have a personal gripe about a bad slide. Normally I'm fine with one that's a little grey zone or hard to classify, and I admit I've gotten my fair share wrong, but this one got right in my craw: http://imgur.com/M3YioIz I see two instances of a cytokinetic bridge and one instance of a lactin filament, but it's classified as intermediate filaments. My accuracy score took a huge hit from that one, and I take pride in my accuracy score. It's low-effort ISK and a chance at a shiny lab coat, so I'm still "satisfied" but this particular slide took a saki bowl worth of wine and some complaining in corp chat before I felt better about it. Aye, there are two ckn bridges visible, but as they aren't stained in the green channel, one should not label them. What you do see is a small intermediate filament stretching over the nucleus, so I'd say it's correct (maybe we should add ccv too though). Having said that, we created a reddit thread for reporting incorrect samples, to easier collect and follow up at: https://www.reddit.com/r/Eve/comments/4gtoyg/project_discovery_collecting_incorrect_control/


HPA Illuminator The Human Protein Atlas 29	Posted - 2016.04.29 13:39:47 - [91] - Quote Moondo wrote: Really, PD??? http://imgur.com/a/KH5W7 REALLY??!!?!?!? This sample has been reported, and i agree it should be nuclear bodies (many). If you take screen dumps, please make sure to include the ID in bottom right corner (and report them to https://www.reddit.com/r/Eve/comments/4gtoyg/project_discovery_collecting_incorrect_control/).
HPA Illuminator The Human Protein Atlas 29	Posted - 2016.04.29 13:47:20 - [92] - Quote Drake Carver wrote: TL:DR >>This post is one big sloppy thank you for this wonderful game. Skip to the end for the actual question. From the beginning I have supported project discovery for its purpose and a fascination with the microscopic world. From my experience so far I find it disheartening that the system can and will be gamed however I am certain methods will arise and adapt to optimize for the best results for the hardworking researchers that will actually make use of the results to refine our knowledge to be less of a guessing game in whatever we MMO player assist in. Now I may be sorely mistaken in the things I am about to suggest but there are some functions that I feel would at least allow serious project discovery players to get a little more satisfaction from a job well done. I often find that sometimes I have made an obvious mistake only after checking all the marks. If there could be a way to report that I am truly mistaken in my result so that I cannot knowingly skew the results I would be thankful. I would still gladly accept the consequences of reductions in accuracy or the nullification of any gains I would have stood to earn. Letting obviously bad results through does not feel right and if I could make reparations I would. TL:DR >>Can there be a button for reporting that a mistake has been made but it was realized only after submitting. I like the idea, will add to idea-document :) However, it's completely up to CCP whether they can and want to implement it.
Tanya Anatolia Minerva's Ward 0	Posted - 2016.04.29 14:54:44 - [93] - Quote I'm glad you're working so actively on quality assurance. This crowdsourcing project was a great idea and it makes me feel good not only that I'm helping science progress, but that I'm making ISK in my downtime. as far as in-game goes, I'm a miner, one of several in my Corp. I never AFK mined to begin with so this just helped break up the tedium, but I have noticed it's greatly reduced the amount of AFK mining others do. Cranking these sheets out with a >60% accuracy score is almost enough to double the income of people with lower skills and cheaper modules. I still have my eyes on that shiny labcoat, but at my current rate of LP gains it'll take a while to get there, how long will project discovery be going on for?
HPA Illuminator The Human Protein Atlas 29	Posted - 2016.04.30 13:46:11 - [94] - Quote Tanya Anatolia wrote: I'm glad you're working so actively on quality assurance. This crowdsourcing project was a great idea and it makes me feel good not only that I'm helping science progress, but that I'm making ISK in my downtime. as far as in-game goes, I'm a miner, one of several in my Corp. I never AFK mined to begin with so this just helped break up the tedium, but I have noticed it's greatly reduced the amount of AFK mining others do. Cranking these sheets out with a >60% accuracy score is almost enough to double the income of people with lower skills and cheaper modules. I still have my eyes on that shiny labcoat, but at my current rate of LP gains it'll take a while to get there, how long will project discovery be going on for? Happy to hear your thoughts on PD! I don't know how long it will be on, but CCP has said that as long as it's popular they'll keep it. In terms of improving accuracy, maybe this would be helpful? We'll also be doing an introductory PD class at EVE uni on Tuesday (first ever :)).


Pages: 1 2 3 4 :: [one page]

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online, the EVE logo, EVE and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to EVE-Search.com to use EVE Online and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, EVE-Search.com. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.