This topic is in reference to discussion from developer chat on July 7, 2015, containing a condensed version of the points raised, with the names of those who raised them, following. Read the original conversation in the dev chat log starting here: http://eternawiki.org/wiki/index.php5/2015.07.31_Dev_Chat#bundlingchat
Here is a condensed (it is still a lot) version of the (really confusing) conversation explaining the idea(s), and some suggestions for how it could be implemented.
- [Nando] This is a general concept for how we work with labs. Groups would submit and voting on designs. It would reactivate the feature of groups, and promote collaboration and discussions. “I noticed that I submitted my 600 designs without ever discussing any of my ideas and hypotheses with anyone. Later I thought, wait a minute, that’s wrong somewhere”
- [Rhiju] The additional piece to this proposal is to eliminate difficulty from designing and voting at one time, through a 3 phase plan, over 4 weeks. Weeks 1-2 is designing bundles, week 3 is voting (bundles would be frozen, players could, in addition to voting, COMMENT on each bundle), and week 4 the top-ranked bundles can be adjusted based on feedback they have received. “This is pretty closely analogous to how expert science is done, with papers/grants submitted; reviewed by peers; and there is a chance for revision. And through the bundle explanations, and comments from players, we’d record quite a bit of our scientific discussion and hypothesis generation.” [jandersonlee]“Two weeks to get O(8000) designs is a tall order, even with teams” [LFP6]"[According to an old GetSat post I found], separate voting used to happen, but people didn’t like it?"
- [General discussion] Groups would create Bundles of solutions, and users would vote on these complete bundles (as opposed to individual solutions), however individual players should be guaranteed at least one submission [Note: I’m assuming that this is speaking about individual submissions here, not in relation to groups].
- [Brourd] Currently, you can join as many groups as you want
- [General consensus] Groups currently are completely underused and basically have no point. [Brourd] Will adding ‘bundles’ really add any collaboration? Wouldn’t this already be happening if it were to happen?
- [Nando]“All it has to be is an incentive for collaborations and sharing of ideas about designing good sequences for the goal at hand”
- [Machinelves]“Groups in foldit seemed to inspire competition and protection of data & info rather than sharing; however within groups and per person, the cookbooks library of strategies helped to share ideas and methods for solving” [Rhiju] “I think all solutions would still be public, but can you think of other ways to incentivize openness and a healthy community?”
- [Rhiju]“The bundles concept is an attempt to solve a few problems. One is that we have so many synthesis slots that it is hard to simply understand the data as a whole. Second issue is that we are not promoting discussion of sequences. The spirit that we had in the early days of eterna wheen there were few synthesis slots and lots of people were incentivized to look at all solutions and all lab data”
- [jandersonlee] 80 bundles is easier to discuss than 8000 submissions [Rhiju]“If each is allowed to present a 140-character theme/summary prepared by the team [it will also help]”
- [Machinelves] What about getting points or badges for applying methods from the strategy market? This would incentivize sharing of methods, and testing of those methods independently, and also reward interaction with other players’ contributions. not a total solution but just an idea"
- [Machinelves/Rhiju] Users may explore various techniques to come up with their solutions, such as a set of iterations exploring changes to that specific sequence, or using a particular bot.
- [LFP6] Having group chats would be one way that would help make groups more useful, where each group has a separate chat channel (the chat interface should probably use tabs).
- [LFP6] Bundles and making groups useful should be treated as completely separate problems. As a starting point, bundles should be available for layers to use, so that when creating a group of related designs (ie testing out a particular hypothesis), they can all be grouped together. In addition, to promote usage of groups, groups should be given the abilities that a user would have (as is already done in some groups which have created a user for themselves). Groups could submit bundles and individual sequences, and submit player puzzles [on prompting from jandersonlee] and labs as well.
Please reply with any additional thoughts to add (or if there’s anything else I can do to clean this up, as I am able to edit my own post with my GetSat permissions). Thanks!