Folding Recognition Measures

This thread is to talk about how we can, as a team, look at folding efforts for measures and recognition of what we are doing that as a team we consider fair, interesting challenging and amusing.

This does not take away what I hope is the basic premise of folding - which is so well put in our motto 'Fold to Cure' and should not be forgotten or in any way compromised.

What is fair will be very different in the eyes of different folders and also from the eyes of non folders.

I hope you can add your creative input, thoughts, constructive comments and suggestions.

There is much debate right now about the top folder awards, how many, what are they calculated on, why have them at all, etc.

I would also like to add into the pot the other current recognitions - the folding hack and individual (folding) signatures.

I would like there to be recognition of effort on more than 1 dimension or even 2 or 3.

As I it see it, currently they are top folder award (monthly), total points (hack blue and golds) and position in team (we are a team after all).

I would like to see more interesting useful and amusing awards that are easier to pick up.

With that that in mind is it feasible and possible with our collective skills and resources for us to build something like the signature block some of us use but with many more categories?

Then we as individuals and members of our folding team can choose to show what is important to us. We can compare our Apples and Oranges and passionately discuss the merits of those

I see categories (repeating some of the current ones):
Individual:
First recorded entry date
Last recorded entry date
Active/Inactive
Team Position
Total Position
Total Points
Total Work Units
Current Update, Day, Week and Month Points
Current Update, Day, Week and Month Work Units
Best Update, Day, Week and Month Points
Best Update, Day, Week and Month Work Units
Average Update, Day, Week and Month Points
Average Update, Day, Week and Month Work Units
% of team or overall for most of above
Fastest Work Unit
Slowest Work Unit
Highest Points per Work Unit
Lowest Points per Work Unit

I do not think we need to decide how or if they can be calculated, lets just see some interesting, useful and amusing stats (given the definition of stats to me is 'Lies, Lies and more Lies')

In that vein I would also like to see:
Current Processors
Average Points per Processor
Most up and down (inconsistent)
Most aggressive
Most improved
Team Work Unit ranking
Team Points ranking
Team Average points ranking
Most Liked - you can't vote for yourself
Most Feared - you can vote for yourself LOL

You guys have got to be more creative than me

Who knows how the current signature some of us use is coded ? So we can work out the skills needed and resources required - I am willing to put my hand up for both in any way I can (used to program but not the best at web database driven stuff - but I'll help and try)

I hope everyone can get passionate and contribute to the discussion, please remember this is for a little gaming competition, fun, can be emotional but it is fundamentally some lace and icing on our devfolding contribution to research.

Im In and willing to help in any way i can

The original folding sigs were created by I think an ex. oca member, who made the site that spawned the sigs. I could be wrong though. I have to look it up.

I do. I've been developing Vista Folding Stat Gadgets. I also have a dedicated XML stat feed being provided by ExtremeOverclocking.

Here's an example of the data available. This is my user info.

Any more suggestions for measures or how we go about them?

Seems to me all the info in the XML feed is already incorporated in the current sig-image, otherwise I'd hack up a new one, but now there's not really a point, unless we want to go scrape the data directly from the Stanford site, like EOC does, which'll take some pretty hefty hardware to do regularily.

To make it fair, share the love and awards and push those in the lead (me included) I have an idea.

In woodchopping you get handicap points based on your current performance the better you are the harder it is for you stay in the lead.

It usually gets to the point where the best cannot stay in front with their advancing handicap and it gives others ago.

The purpose is to make it more even no matter how big, fast or strong you are over time your are all evened out. The more you win the more your handicap goes up (when you do not win it goes down).

Just a thought as part of the basis for the folding awards scheme. The best will still stay high and fight for the top but it does give the newcomers a chance and over time forces even the best to look at how they can overcome their new handicap.

I find that the Kakaostats site is at least an hour ahead of the EOC table. I'm sure that they get they're stats direct from Stanford.