Hello: I know the issue of credits for work has touched many times, but I think it is getting worse, I mean.

For ordinary users care more or less the credits and bonuses is hard to understand that a task that lasts twice as no other has twice the credits.

I have read all the explanations that have been published on the subject, method of calculation time ratio and the possibility of error executions etc ... but the issue is much simpler and can not believe that scientists have so little vision and general psychology.

Whatever we say we all looked, even sideways, how many credits gives us the work we do.

Short tasks have little demand for his poor performance in claims in relation to the runtime, it's that simple.

The tasks to be angry over the staff when there is no relationship between the working hours of one and the other end with your credit.

Those who take more than 24H cards execute not mean losing the bonus, it's that simple.

In short I think it would be an improvement in project performance tasks which give credit in a linear fashion to its running time, is simple.

As far as I can understand what Master Yoda ;) ummm Carlesa says, I do agree with her last phrase.
I think it would be much easier to see if a host fails some tasks if credits were granted in direct ratio with the running time of the task.

Carlesa says, I do agree with her last phrase.
I think it would be much easier to see if a host fails some tasks if credits were granted in direct ratio with the running time of the task.

Hi, Thanks for the support.

I think this is similar to what happened a while ago with the problem of forwarding tasks.
It was a matter of applying the simplest solution to avoid unnecessarily duplicative. Greetings.