etherwiz

First Off - the Ability to Copy the General Chat would be nice (mopst prople realize they can do that from the Temp Chat File anyway). You can already copy/pate to the Chat Window now ! 2nd Off - when a Tournament is Canceled BBO should notify anyone who registered for that Tournamant. Perhaps a (max 128 charactor) explaination could be typed by the person who canceled it could be Msged to them. Thanks

I Like the Idea - often I want an explaination of thier card, more details, or if they are willing to drop a few conventions. Perhaps most importantly is wiether they want to have fun during the game (while trying to win) or if they are the WIN-WIN-WIN type ! Just a simplier way then going back (all he way) to the Lobby) and finding thename - then chating and haveing to re-invite if acceptable. Perhaps just CLICKING the name in the Partnership Desk List to invoke the chat would be best! _*_Dave

HI My Problem is with the AutoUpdate from BBO. My 3.9.2 fuctions great! But every since he Update to 3.9.3 was offered my computer tries to load it (get the Message, the Update Action window) but the only not-Greyed button is the CANCEL. I can browse and pick a new directory ok - but the UPDTE button is is still inactive. After I cancel the update I can start and get into BBO with out the update stuff poping up, but the next time I get on I have to cancel it again. Thanks, _*_Dave

one person's neat is another person's trash .................. I know I would perfer the recording any hands played - because a lot times the hands I want to go over with my partner are simply not there. Bidding is bidding and play is play no matter where it is done. So there for any boards we play are possible to want (need) afterwards. Even the unpreduictable TP stuff. The reason TP never caught on with the Tourney Feature here is that the TP rounds are eliminate-ing. The Tourney features combine all rounds point for a winner. This defeats the stratagy preacticed in TD. to win each round by POINTS ONLY, only considering your table and your opps each round! _*_Dave

do we not allready have a private club that inclused all who can TD on BBO ??? the problems is people do not really play there! What is needed is an icon on people's name who are TD's. and maybe an agreement that people who are TDs's help with s a few each week. At least then people will know who to ask ! also asking people whose judgement you trust yet are not TD's might help get us more qualified TD's (but you would have to tell them how to do things, sometimes worse then having no one that helps!) _*_Dave

Perhaps the easiest solution would be a simple Elapsed Time psted to the whatever is sent. The elasped time is started when ever something (a bid, a Alert (or private chat) from opp, a card play) and is also sent with whatever from your machine in response. This way the elasped time for any sequence of events can be easily seen. Probably be a night mare of changing code (something so much easier when code is just added), This would probably not be worth the effort expended (except to the TD's) I could see where this could very usefull ..................... _*_Dave

I do admitt that the idea is more interesting to me after read the posts. However the tendancy for people who make a good board first and continued to make above adverage oe adverage boards only after that would then then tend to play slowly (perhaps not to the point of cheating, and may be not even conciouslly doing it) are great. there would have to be some sort of adjustment made for the people's unfinished boards, A greater math mind then mine would have to write that - to be fair for for the prople who completed fewer boards but scored higher consistantly to win over them that scored just slightly above adverage consistantly over a larger number. I dislike the boards played = sections as impractable. Perhaps a range of time (no new rounds started after say 10 minutes before a certain time) and everyone else must play untill one round less then the most rounds completed (leaving only two boards to adverage). This would still leave some adverageing in, but limit it, it would also not guarentee a stop time (but should come really close). It could be made even closer by not allowing ANYONE to play more then 2 rounds ahead (or 1 round) ahead of the second fastest players. Does that make any sense ??? _*_Dave

Unfortunately as BBO grows, the .1% of "bad members" also grows. Remember the one bad apple can spoil the whole barel. I personally have no objection to anything I say being recorded, but then I am sober right now. In another state I would probably would object (when the Hangover happens at least). But I had to vote no on recording public chat. That is a political view rather then a proactical or enforcable one. Wither BBO can have a site then allow "Site-Recorded: Pricate Chat may be leagally questionable, but would be morally justified. Also unforunately the courts are more concenred with the Questionable Laws then the Moral certainty of what actually happened. But that is another matter mostly ignored. I beleive BBO has the right to record private conversations (both in Tourney and in Chat Room) anywhere. Making that public would quickly reduce the use of the site (or reduce the "happy use" of thier site at least). Even in a temporary form (only hold for 24 hours, and if needed copy it out to a leagle document, I would still object. But that is me. And I would mostly benifit from this anyway, as I KNOW I would object more to what is said TO me then what I say to others. But sometimes Private Thoughts are sent as private text. This includes health information as well as practical life-thype questions. A bridge site is not the proper site fir this stuff, but people being people will still think Private is Private, even if a warning is given on sign on. These could be embarressing to such people if made public. And yes I know that BBO would never publish something with the only intention of embarressing someone, but site owners are like the goverment, no one really likes trusting them ! There is no question you have the right to record private chat (and I would perfer that then trusting copies made from some users machines) but does BBO have the moral right to call it "Private Chat" then ? Terminology. Words and inturputation ..................... most deffinitions are in the eyes of the beholder ........................... _*_Dave

1 TD's should alert their own tournaments (as done now) 2. IF Lobby Chat is turned off (as I do when directing and often when playing) the ACBL alerts should not be shown to me. Currently most TD's anouncements do not make it thru, but ACBL does and that is distracting at the least. 3) a TD can allready anounce only to his club members (On Line Only I think). Inshort this is a good idea to automatically alert touneys (some times I get there to find $ needed and I never have any! (I rarely have my Rent anyway!)) so to cut off anoiuncements for PAID TOURNEYS to people with out money in account is an EXCELLENT IDEA. But the added changes would not be worth it. Besides the creativety used by the TD's writing the adds would be missed ! _*_Dave

I think the small ♠ is the most I can do. My first choice would a low ♦ (and that still might be correct) but with the direct bidding to 3NT I would have to assume that the opps have most High Cards) and even tho I have the length in ♦ my partner may have the corrosponding honor to take advantage of it. The ♠ will give away what probably is the only Ace the opps miss, but it also gives my partner a clear lead back to my hand if ♦ can get any tricks. I might be wrong .......................... _*_Dave

No objection to "normal" adds. This means not only Pop-Ups but viruses (including things like Home Page ReMapping) and ADDVERTIZING Self-Install Programs or Tracking Programs) are definately off limits. But I think you guys would not do anyway. You must make enough to feed your families and we can not expect BBO to continue on with no more money with the way the cost of living has gone (let alone the cost of MILK). I personally would not to see alcohol or "girlie" (prorno) adds, but strangely enough if I had to choice I would rather my 13 year old girl not see the Alcohol ones (I think she is smart enough to stay away from the Porno Stuff or at least smart enough for them not harm her), but Alcohol can easily be assumed the Normal (as Tobacco) and therefore mead to more harm when someone young is drinking. Let's face, if morals are not learned by 12-13 years old, they simply will not be learned and nothing can be done about that. But the learning means nothing when someone is drunk for the first few times and the normalzation of drinking (even beer) can be very distructive, leading not to the merry parties shown in adds but to a totally different result. But then you do not have many young players, But then for the few you do I hope you want to impress on them that Bridge has a higher plane then Budwizer or Miller Light ! I honestly do not think you would place "girly" stuff on something you have worked this hard to get a name for ! _*_Dave

Has not happened to me for several updates at least. And has only happened once - two other times it threw me out of BBO (but I slso runa lot of stuff at the same time (weird stuff because I am using a server to play in - and that is not a good idea anyway).

I perfer the Odd/Even system. But I also play a varient. Odd 1st play on a suit means I like the suit (even if I have to go HIGH). Even 1st play means I do not (Even if even card IS HIGH). Same applies on discard (to the siut I discarded) but the not liking the suit I discarded only means I MIGHT LIKE THE OTHER SUIT (chances pretty good cause by the time that happens three suits have been played ond if I showed no preference allready then either the last suit is good or we want a new dealer ! Sure - sometimes you can not have the proper card in hand, and a lot of times the proper card to play (out of my hand) is an 8 ot worse yet 10 to show "No More PLEASE" but then again, if I only have a few then maybe I can trump in later. Bit then there is always the ten 7 5 3 (four cards and too show disfavour I MUST THEN play the 10 on the first trick ! usally not desired logical play). But I have found very few who want to play even the unmodified OE carding. Most time people want Odd/Even to show Origional Number (odd/evven number) in hand. Still more want the simplier HIGH = Wanted (most time). LOW = "no way OR I have no choice". No matter what convention is used your hands will never fit it ! _*_Dave

TD's (specially) should be aware that a lot (if not most) accuzations of chating are by envious people. A lot of the other is againt particular lucky opps, and still more are against the occassionaly lucky opps. THis does not leave much of the reports of cheating. And one more thing, no one has said anything about the pairs that MIGHT be cheating but have "normal" boards. :) There must INDISPUTABLE EVIDENCE for me to report someone. More times then not, reports are for foul manners and/or language against Opps and/or partner. That is provable easyly (chat records) but what is offense to someone is often a joke (or worse yet - an affectionate jesture) by the maker. So what is left. The very slim amount of intentional cheting (very hard to verify) and the obnoixious players that are continueingly reported. So it is very important the reports are made, so that ABUSE can discover the ture number of reports against any one person. But it is also important that only SERIOUS ALLEGATIONS that can be bakcked by records be reported so as not to waiste time. Also remember that if you have evidense (but do not know if it is enough to warrent reporting) just report it. Only thouse who are reported X number of times are investigated and we only can reach that nnumber of times if incidents are reported. Perhaps ABUSE was just on the edge of talking to that player and your report will push it in the direction to correct a problem, or maybe that player has never been reported and will not suffer ANY for the single incident. A final observation, you may have evidence in the form of a players chat record, but you might have to take the time to tell the player HOW to send it to you. In the middle of the tournament ! Very hard to do, and quite frequently the cha proves every accussation false too, after you go to the trouble of course. Like I said this would be ETHICS Committy and ETHICS must include not only all countries's version of ethics, but also all personality types too. _*_Dave

That is agred by almost everyone here. Actual Cheating is a small % of reported. But that is also not my Point. This would be an ETHICS committy. Ethics would also include Foul Launguage, Rumours, allegations about non-bridge stuff, and we could even include Moral Ambiqueties !! In short we do not KNOW what the Ethics committy could be called to act on. Because of this I put in a LARGE Percentage. I also put in quite a sizable knock down in the numbers to compensate. [uday] I have to GO now, so continue later - but no one knows how many they will be once the floodgates are open. 5% is a starting place. _*_Dave

Well I can no longer assume you mean to conduct a logicaland calm discussion no matter what I say. You have certainly revealed YOUR REASONS you post here. Two Things: 1st - I have never had to report anyone from any of my Tourneys, twiece I had to call someone to help, and once I ALMOST reported someone for abuse of the TD (I give players a resonable limit to express anger). From my first day on BBO - I think I have expressed personal interest (understated) (sent Documentation) in three cases to UDay. So it is a lot rarer (aparently) for me to start investigations then for you. 2nd - I was talking about the entirety of BBO. Once we start an ethics committy, it's use will not stay for just non-club tournaments. First of all you know that someone will apeal a ruling made in a club. Second of all - they are arguements in the Main Room which do get nasty and will result in letters to abuse (or however the Committy gets them). This will happen even if it is public knowledge that the Ethics Committy only deals with Public Tournaments (but of course you will say it could never happen - beyond the scope of the committy) and the committy could always reject such claims it still has to have a proceedure to reject them. Eventually there will be so many complaints that the committy must hear them or have a LOT looking for Fred/UDay/Rain to handle them. Because you totally know the future and exactly what can happen there, I assume you will be dropping out of this discussion So two things need to de decided if we are to have this Committy. First we need to know what Power that Committy has. I propose that they can make reccomendations and the true Owners of the Site can carry them out (allows both to blame the other due to proceedure). If the committy can take action, how much action do they have. Suspension ? Length of Susension ? Expulsion ? With reccomendations again they can reccomend anything but do not have the power to do it. That reccomendation can be adjusted (up or down) byt the owners. Second we need to set up a proceedure to follow in each case. And do each case the same way. For example - assign the case to one person for reaserch and presentation to the committy. At presentation should the complainet be there ?? Should the TD (if any) be there ? Should the people complained against be there ?? (they may be allowed to present a defense by email with attachments if availible (chat Logs, boards, etc.)). At the committy meeting - who is charge (moderates the discussion - calls an end to the presentation of one side or the other (if needed)). What happens if the Vote is so close that a final decission can not be reached ? How many committy members will contitute a Qurom ? These may seam minor items now, but certainly need to be agreed BEFORE the committy starts it's job. And who will be on the committy? Maybe the first committy should be volunteers that Fred appoints. but do they have the power to nominate other members? How about replacements for people who drop out ? (I know some people will say NO ONE will ever drop out, but can we really assume everyone serving is made immortal by the service?) So many details and we must talk about each and every one before the committy meats. _*_Dave (please notice I do not respond to assinine statements, in this case quite a literal assinine statement)

By the way - this LEAGALLY is not true. The owners of a (Internet) Forum are protected against liabelity charges only if they DO NOT CENSOR the forum. Now this is (of corse) subject to reasonable limitations, like any limit in the USA. Although I beleive the limitations exists as far as the CASH you give your Lawyers, there are certain "Reasonable" inferences made to censorship. The most clear example is NOT REMOVING anything Criminal from you forums (unless a goverment agency asks you not to (to "trap" who ever is doing it)). Not removing something Criminal is (of itself) a seperate crime. HOWEVER THE ESSENCE to this protection from Liabilities that is extended every Internet Vendor is they do NOT CENSOR the discussion. If they are caught censoring ONE ITEM that is not clearly unreasonable. then they can SUCCESSFULLY SUED for anything anyone says on thier board. This is because the law assumes reasonableness (when not in the eye of the goverment) actually is in the eye of beholder. The judge does not even have to agree with statement the carrier (BBO in this instance) is worth suing over. All the suer has to show damages occured to him/her. They do not have to be finacial damages but can be emotional or mental (and what the devil is the difference between these two anyway). The law specifically states that once censorship has occured the carrier (BBO here - if they did the censorship) they are then responsible for every message on the forum. If they do not censor (other then stated above), then they DO NOT ASUME the liabilities of all Forum Posts. Now this may seam like the Law is unreasonable in itslef. It might be. But this law is also acknowledged byt International Law and has been for a long time (compared to the age of the interent that is). _*_Dave

OK - let us assume you have honorable intentions in your post. Let us also assume that BBO has an adverage of 1500 players on line at any given hour of the day. And let us also say that only 5% of the players complain. That is 75 complaints. Now let us also assume that only 33% of the complaints are about the ethics of other players (the rest can be just plain software complaints "WHY THE H*LL CAN'T THIS SIMPLE @#*&*&@# PROGRAM FIX MY COFFEE ?", or just genneral charactor assasignations of the Owners / Yellows / Vocal Players) or perhaps some have enough resonableness to them that they must be lumped in with the so called 33% I contemplate would need further investigation. That makes the number 25, 25 PER HOUR ! given 24 hours per day - 7 days a week (you can do the math?) Even If SOME are REPORTS for the same Player How BIG a committy is neded. OK, maybe the committy can hire out seperate investigators (and by the same logic I guess we should MAKE the people investigated PAY FOR THIER INVESTIGATION ???). These are the numbers that may be involved. Then again, the numbers could be larger. Over the next few years are LIKELY TO BE LARGER! Yes - you have shown how easy it is to get players records from BBO. May I also assume YOU YOURSELF will do ALL THE INVESTIGATIONS for this Ethics Committy ?? Now while I am still in favour of an Ethics Committy (despite the numbers), I still feel that what is considered an ethics violation (cheeting) needs to be a lot more clearly defined and the actions of such a committy LIMMITED TO recomendations only. And if this seams like I want the OWNERS to take responsibility, guess what? They are the owners, and even if they offred stock in BBO I would still feel it is the Stock Owners end responsibility. If they do not want to be owners, there are ways to set up TAX FREE foundations that would insure them (mostly - but not against all) liabilities of Ownership. Therefore the committy only RECOMENDS ACTIONS and never takes them. Now a save way out for any owner is to always follow thier committy's recomendations (and no one can ever blame them anything, except maybe the way it is set up which never be as server a liability as the action itself). In the good ole USA there is ALWAYS a way around any law, with out even considering bribery. That is the American Way ! Now as far as you excepting all my hands for one day in a discussion forum on CHEATING, I still think you owe both Me, BBO (and the entire membership of BBO) an apology. Perhaps you were just making a point, and perhaps you felt that because it was my post that caused you to think this way you should make it with my record. Perhaps not. Perhaps it was not to discredit me. PERHAPS. Who (other then you) can say. I do know what I say to it, it was only a handfull of boards that day (pun intented), one day I did not play much. Take that times the full six months back (or even 3 months back - 180 days) multiply that times 25. Mulitply that number times 24. To be fair let us cut that number by 50% now. NOW MULTIPLY THAT TIMES THE DAYS LEFT IN YOUR LIFE and remember it will not stop there, you have just left it up to others to carry on your own villagence after you death. Do you always leave that much of the work to others ? And that assumes you are doing everything you can to make this happen. No days off, not even vacations. No other job, even to make money you may or may not need (assume you can live forever with out another dime). Remember this started out with assumeing that 5% of the players will complain, and only 33% of thouse complaints have any validity at all. Good Luck (and I am looking farward to seeing your next post here) _*_Dave

First off the low heart follow to the heart lead is perfectly resonable and one that I could figuare out for myself! The defensive Lead of a low ♦ was very gutsy but also could probably be figuared out (but not by me). SO is this what you would consider PROOF that cheating had occured -GEE I thought I bad of other players sometimes. I would never even consider that (one play of one card (the ♦) a cheat. I am talking about a lot more then that. One time the dummy told his partner to claim when we had more then enough time to play it out (9 cards left and 5 mins on the clock). When his partner claimed and I rejected (it was no where close to certainly theirs) he then told his partner in CHAT which TWO of Three Possible finnesses to take that would get them thier contract ! And he had told his partner to CLAIM with TWO OVERS they did not make ! Backed up by the chat records - this is the proof I am talking about, what is needed to farward to ABUSE and what the TD should consider when making rule-ings. _*_Dave

Hi - this replay is more to the point of the last few pages then my other posts have been 1st - I have not only been a programmer working in the "trenches" as Fred and UDay are (doing the design, programming, testing, error tracking and fixing on a day to day basis simply because we are the only ones in the computer department) - I have also been a Project Manager many times and System person on International Insurane Company's Main Frame. I GUARENTEE YOU that there are many more practical, User-Wanted, and Comercial Aspects they they both could be working on then customizing the software to record charges about the ethical of users! I am also sure that if we could come up with someting that had more then a slim hope of success they would do it. But several factors lead me to the conclusion that this may not happen. a) There is NO WAY that from a recording of the bidding and play anyone except an All-Knowing GOD could tell the cheaters from the talented, from the Lucky, or even from the UnLucky but Once In A BLue Moon .................... This is simply imposiible. Even it LOOKS LIKE, even if 5 TRillon Master Point Winner says "It SURE LOOKS LIKE CHEATING", there is no way anyone can ever say 100% certainty. :o An investigation about someone would have to record EVERY HAND THEY PLAY (at least in Tournament play) just to be sure that they do not react the same ALL THE TIME and got complaints only when they "lucked out". And worse yet - perhaps they only play that way with a certain partner (I myself make bids with novices I would never try with my betters - but that is because I know my betters would open hands of less then 13 pts or only 4 major suit). c) for such an Ethics Committie to be created both UDay and Fred would have to have totally implicit trust in (most) committy members. Because if the Committy ever left the cause - THEY THEMSELFS would have to run it. If anyone thinks it is bad now, what would it be like if an Ethics Committy got up and running for only 3 or 4 months then disbanded ? 2nd - no time for a second right now, but I have other problems that might come up with the other topics presented here - Be Back Soon _*_Dave

call me CHICKEN and I will agree 1) PASS 2) Vul:Pass and Not Vul:Pass or 1D (depends on how much I have drinking)

I think people are missing the Point here. Any Private club can exclude s person from their rans. Any TD can exclude a Name from thier tournaments. If the misbehavoir is bad enough to bother people OUTSIDE of your Clubs/Tounraments then a note should be sent to @ABUSE (and probably something THAT BAD would be noticed and sent by much more then one person - even one TD. This is BBO's Site (Fred, UDay, Rain) and they should determine if someone misbehaves bad enough to be eliminated. By the way, once a person has been blacklisted just changing tne name will not get them back on, in fact just changing the IP address would not get them back on. There are a few things that might - but I am not going to anounce them here ! I am sure that any club could set up a panel of experts to judge otheres, that would be up to who ever "owns" that club. A Director could also do this - but such judgements could not be enforced (mandatory) for all Directors. I am also sure that the Staff of BO will pay more then close attention to any recomendations by a club owner or a TD. I am also sure that they would require little more then information from such a person to ban someone. The discussion here is moot. What BBP does is what BBO does and I am sure that Fred (UDay, Rain) would not accept an process of appeal they did not set up themselves. It is after all - their place. If it was as simple as just a commity of Yellows, I am sure it would be done by now. But the fact is each Yellow has his/her own area of responsibility which takes time, plus they do like to simply play themselvs. _*_Dave

Thanks I will have to try Guided mode to see if I should tell people to use them, however once a computer illeterate person sees the effects masters like you can achieve, they will try it and get all thier tags lost or misplaced. I have confidence in that ! I know - I teach computers at Community Coll. one thing answered - Quotin strips the code from the Quote. I will just have to play with. But how about Spelling correction ??? Qould be nice................. _*_Dave

:P The New Tool Feature is Great ! I no longer have to explain to others how to get the record of thier hands ! Of course once they select "My Hands" the ones who I had to explain it to before still need an explaination about "Enter you Name & Password", lets put 1 in so we see only today's hands, and exactly what 3nSx-2 means . . . . BUT I DO NOT HAVE TO GUESS WHAT ICONS ARE ON THEIR DESKTOP ! That alone will cut must frustration. And on top of that there will be many, many, many more using this forum. The More the Merrier! Of course that also means the more to read which will up my daily frustration, but in a much nicer way then computer illerterate do. _*_Dave