How the top scorers get those scores.

[MahFL]

I can scan a movie in well under 7 seconds and I am not cheating.

[JOC]

I can scan a movie in well under 7 seconds and I am not cheating.

The key point there, MahFL, for non-cheaters is... would you say you generally spend much longer time on the calibration movies??


Now...

Today I have started over with the same dedication. I have seen 1080 movies, and again, clicked a few times on what might actually be dust

Seems logical to me that the calibration and non-calibration movies would both show the same ripples.

Would either of you care to name one of the real movie ID's (which you've clicked on as a possible track) that has the same light/dark circles in the top frame like in calibration movies?

[MahFL]

Actually I spend more time on real movies that look like they may have a track. Most of the calibration movies are very obvious, some of them are sneaky though as the "track" is tiny. Also the other day I was dog tired and I clicked "no track" when there was a huge track on it, lol.

[JOC]

MahFL: "Actually I spend more time on real movies... that look like they may have a track. Most of the calibration movies are very obvious, some of them are sneaky though as the "track" is tiny."

I understand, MahFL. That's exactly what I was getting at... it's if there is an abnormal general bias of spending more time on (mostly easy) calibrations and very little time on (mostly problematical) real movies, then there's something wrong happening.

For the vast majority, who are doing the right things, that wouldn't apply

Happy dusting, as they say!

[minkiemink]

Please read the new Update post from the team. Several of you may wish to apologize for you comments.

Back to dusting....

Minkie

[minkiemink]

Your comments...I may be able to find dust, but I still can't type.

[flashgordon]

Howdy Everyone,

I have the issue of getting down to about 190 and then I have to get busy with other things and come back and I'm back at about 250. Of course it doesn't matter much about the score. I want a particle. And by the way I have a 98% specificy? and a 95% sensitivity. I am running a cable connection that will download a movie in about 2 seconds. I do have a tendency to start looking at the movie before it completes the download. Finally I do have one event marked as passed step 1. I don't see the reason for cheating since the reason for doing this is to find the dust not get a great score. By the way to the top 100, Keep up the great scanning.

Flashgordon

[sub212]

yes, compliments to the top 300, you're the only ones still active. I stay away three days and sink only 6 places (around 600)

[buddhabuddha]

yes, compliments to the top 300, you're the only ones still active. I stay away three days and sink only 6 places (around 600)

hey now... some of us are are still very active and way under the top 300...I'm ranked at 776 and have been reviewin movies pretty much every day since the launch...slow and steady... 99.31%/99.78% (consider me quality control!)

I'm in awe of those in the top 100! You guys rock! Keep it up!

[Howie]

Don't know if this is good or bad???

I have been holding around 97%/97%...
Also Holding Rank between 550 and 625...
Have clicked on quite a few movies per my list...BUT,,,
I find it strange that the highest number of viewers is 207 on one movie, out of 13,000 all this time, with all the high scorers out there,,,
I feel I am watching more CM and Out of Focus than real movies, along with others...
You would think more viewers especially when you click a movie with 50 out of 200 ???

Your Overall Score: 1230
Total Movies Viewed: 4509
Your Rank: 538 out of 13684

[Mash]

If you ask me, their "standards" are unrealistic. I feel if you are in the top 10 percent, like I am, you are doing great!

[greuti]

Hey, roughly speaking, today (now) I'm on a level with Irene!!!

http://stardustathome.ssl.berkeley.edu/c_rankings.php

[pepperammi]

Not that I can criticize since I'm new, but is it wise it go thought that idea of multiple windows open? Yes I’ve already got to the speed that it doesn't load up quick enough for me so I'm sat waiting- but I spend that time waiting for the next movie to pre-cache to make extra sure I've been thorough,
and yes you would probably be able to get thought them quicker but I don’t think it should be about getting as many done as quick as possible or getting a high score.
My point, are those that spend such short time spending enough time on a movie? Even though I'm new and only done about 700 movies I'm quite quick but I still make myself take that extra second or so just to be sure

For example, of these two that are possibilities only a small amount of viewers have clicked on it.

http://stardustathome.ssl.berkeley.edu/ ... =4397867V1 205 views and only 62 thought saw something

http://stardustathome.ssl.berkeley.edu/ ... d=158707V1 even worse because this hard to spot- 195 views and only 11 spots.

Did they not click because didn't think its not worth flagging? or because they didn't spot them at all? I would have though it should be more than a quarter of viewers noticing these things.

Maybe the calibration movies are too easy. To me seems vast majority are as easy as pie. If they where a bit harder then it might make people more inclined to spend a tiny bit more time and the science might be done more accurately?

Nothing wrong with people being faster than average, Just wont to be sure they're not flicking thought them too quickly.

[Groundling]

Hi pepperammi;
I also wonder if the rush to get a high score will cost accuracy.
The movie 4397867V1 looks so perfect I cannot understand
the lack of agreement. Maybe speed, maybe the fact that its
on the edge of a ridge, maybe some were distracted by the
big blob next to it. The fact remains that it is as close to a
training film as you can get.
On the other hand, 158707V1 looks more like one of those
"inclusions". I have clicked on a few of those but I don't have
much faith in them.
You must go with the training and then use your own judgement.
Your technique must be good to pick out these examples.
Groundling

[minkiemink]

I have only ever used one window. I opened two windows once, just to see what everyone else was trying, but immediatetly found it too distracting. I use the load time to look.

-Mink