Who will dare to change the title to ' Who is ruInning GIMPS'. Just a letter change, so many consequences.

OK. Now I'm mistified.
Wasn't the original title 'Who is running GIMPS'?

Still, noone is ruining GIMPS.
George ruNs it, he won't let it be ruIned.

[QUOTE=firejuggler;354934]Who will dare to change the title to ' Who is ruInning GIMPS'. Just a letter change, so many consequences.[/QUOTE]

Ask and you'll receive...[COLOR="White"]whether you like it or not[/COLOR]

:love: supermods changing titles. I like this one.

[color=white]Bwaaa, ha hahahaa, brilliant!

[thinking]
We have to see how can we bribe some gerbils to delete this current post, and post #46... We don't want to be part of this group of people here, who is ruining GIMPS!
[/thinking][/color]

[QUOTE=LaurV;354967][COLOR=Yellow][thinking]
We have to see how can we bribe some gerbils to delete this current post, and post #46... We don't want to be part of this group of people here, who is ruining GIMPS!
[/thinking][/COLOR][/QUOTE]

I understand that gerbils really like big, powerful motorcycles, and unlimited fuel supplies.

[QUOTE=kladner;354969]I understand that gerbils really like big, powerful motorcycles, and unlimited fuel supplies.[/QUOTE]You understand correctly.

Water-cooled shaft-drive Hondas by preference but, I believe, compromise is possible under the right circumstances. Colo{,u}red black helps.

[QUOTE=kladner;354969]I understand that gerbils really like big, powerful motorcycles, and unlimited fuel supplies.[/QUOTE]

Back in June the gerbil-in-chief sent us this pic of what we can only presume is the GIC on his current favorite ride:

[QUOTE=sonjohan;354931]David,
Who is running GIMPS you ask?
* [B]George is. End of story[/B].[/QUOTE]
You'll go far.
Don't they have rahetorical questions in Belgium?
[QUOTE]* If George wouldn't agree with what gpu72 does, he'd block it.[/QUOTE]No. He would discuss it with Chris.[QUOTE]You'd like to be in charge of who gets what, and if possible, you'd tell people what [B]they [/B]should do.
* That's not going to happen.[/QUOTE]
Not at all. The discussion is about the best strategy for assisting LL, and thus making "What Makes Sense" as sensible as we can for the many who opt for this. This discussion might better be conducted in private, but as evidenced by the divergence of Chris and my views, might well benefit from anyone with a good understanding of the topic.
That is why I started this thread.
I realized there would be some "noises off".
[QUOTE]As I mentioned in another thread: "Your incessant nagging has chased away a few of the biggest contributors to the TF effort."
Stop nagging.[/QUOTE]Yes. Pete worked himself into a real tiswas, because I had dared to disagree with the supreme leader of GPUto72.He threatened that if I didn't stop immediately and grow up, he would lobby for me to be banned, and throw all his toys out of the pram.
When I failed to show sufficient contrition, he threw is toys out anyway. Chris took this hard, and banned me with the excuse that "Pete is more useful to the project than you".
[QUOTE]George isn't asking a change of functionality of gpu72.
George hasn't objected to the change of settings (what to TF to which level).[/QUOTE]No, but he is always willing to consider possible improvements, when they are suggested.
[QUOTE] You've given your point of view, with your data and theory.
* It didn't stick enough that other users and/or George would ask a change in gpu72.
* So either your logic is incorrect (based on the current [B]empirical [/B]data, you seem to be), or the gain seems to be insufficient for others to be bothered.
* Again, [B]end of story[/B]. [/QUOTE]Just wait.
[QUOTE]Also: if you don't GPU-TF, you shouldn't interfere with what others do with their GPU. [B][U]MY GPU, MY CHOICE.[/U][/B][/QUOTE]
If I don't GPU-TF you could say I was in a better position to consider the total effort from a distance.
As soon as Oliver announced mfaktc, it was I who led the discussion of how many more bits could be done by GPU than on CPU, hence the name GPUto72.
Furthermore, as an LL-er, I am acutely aware of what is helpful for it.
Most notably 62M TFed to 73 rather than 67M TFed to 74.

This is what I am arguing for, and also that the empirical data shows that you can't TF everything >63M to 74 [B]and [/B]keep pace with LL demand.

The basis on which Chris bases his claim that you can is just phooey.
(that is why I said "just wait" above).

David

[QUOTE=davieddy;355163]Just wait.[/QUOTE]I had a supervisor for a while that said that. He said that everything would come out in his report. (You remind me of him in several ways.)






He didn't pass probation.:boxer:

[QUOTE=davieddy;355015]Now that pic might get Kieran excited!

I think he might also like this link
[URL]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ISzoUdtMSH4[/URL]
which I attached to my remark "I don't think so".
.......
D[/QUOTE]

Cool song. Sad story associated. The moped washer would have to show some face, at least, but the general impression is to yawn. No offense intended, just not excitement material for me.