[QUOTE=chalsall;307763]Third.[/QUOTE]

.....etc.

[QUOTE=chalsall;307763]Third.[/QUOTE]

Please do it.

Agree

Forget it.
FIND ANOTHER PRIME

[QUOTE=flashjh;307772]Agree[/QUOTE]

[AOL] Me too... [/AOL]

Luigi

I basically agree. We do need rules enforced

My first assignment ever took 15 months but I did check in regularly and made slow but steady progress and I would have hated to lose it.

I think it should not be released as long as there is:
1. Reasonable(???) progress for active assignments
2. A declining complete date for queued assignments
3. A total estimated queued + active time of less than a reasonable(???) total.

With reasonable(???) defined previously by George dependant on assignment type and exponent range.

As a response to some of the criticism when the assignment recycling rules were originally proposed, [URL="http://www.mersenneforum.org/showpost.php?p=222240&postcount=459"]George suggested[/URL] amongst other things the following:
[QUOTE]It seems like the suggested policy needs to be tweaked somewhat. Perhaps, it should only apply to exponents in or near the "preferred" ranges. That is, something like DC's under 24M, first LLs under 42M, P-1 under 50M, and TF under 60M.
[/QUOTE]I would support this amendment wholeheartedly (obviously with the given boundaries adjusted to reflect the current preferred ranges). There is no need to reassign someone's work if the assignment is active albeit slow and they are not holding up progress towards milestones and the like. This would ensure that slower participants still have a role to play in the project.

[QUOTE=Brian-E;307819]As a response to some of the criticism when the assignment recycling rules were originally proposed, [URL="http://www.mersenneforum.org/showpost.php?p=222240&postcount=459"]George suggested[/URL] amongst other things the following:
I would support this amendment wholeheartedly (obviously with the given boundaries adjusted to reflect the current preferred ranges). There is no need to reassign someone's work if the assignment is active albeit slow and they are not holding up progress towards milestones and the like. This would ensure that slower participants still have a role to play in the project.[/QUOTE]

Excellent reminder/addition. :tu:

Please allow me to register my dissent. We should really be implement such strict recycling rules for exponents much closer to the trailing edge. Many people have unattended or remote borgs that are on for only some of the time every day and complete slow but steady progress. These may take upto a year or more for a DC but as long as they are moving forwarded and not significantly holding up any milestones they should be allowed to continue. For instance, I have a 25.3M which is 526 days old but it is 67% finished and should now be done in about a month.

Instead I propose:
[QUOTE]
For LL tests on exponents within 5M of trailing edge (or whatever is reasonable) and not manual testing:

If assignment is 1 year old and <10% complete it is recycled.
If assignment is 1.5 years old and < 50% complete it is recycled.
If assignment is 2 years old it is recycled.

For DCs within 2M of trailing edge:

If assignment is 180 days old and < 10% complete it is recycled
If assignment is 270 days old and < 50% complete it is recycled
If assignment is 365 days old it is recycled

For TF/ECM/P-1 assignments:
Leave them alone.

[/QUOTE]

[QUOTE=garo;307829]Please allow me to register my dissent. We should really be implement such strict recycling rules for exponents much closer to the trailing edge. Many people have unattended or remote borgs that are on for only some of the time every day and complete slow but steady progress. These may take upto a year or more for a DC but as long as they are moving forwarded and not significantly holding up any milestones they should be allowed to continue. For instance, I have a 25.3M which is 526 days old but it is 67% finished and should now be done in about a month.[/QUOTE]

That was Brian-E's point which I :tu:'d. He reminded us that George suggested only applying such rules to "preferred" exponents. Your example of 25.3M would qualify under the preferred or even your own definition of trailing edge. Edit: By your own rules, your 25.3M would be recycled.

[QUOTE=garo;307829]If assignment is 1 year old and <10% complete it is recycled.


If assignment is 180 days old and < 10% complete it is recycled.[/QUOTE]

I would say 25% or 30% instead of 10% imo.