slothy Posted March 28, 2004 Report Share Posted March 28, 2004 some write there experts only.. some writes fun only...etc etcmaybe IMO we can try writing "BY INVITATION ONLY" maybe that helps a little:))thank you ecepal First welcome to the forum Ece.... do you think that will still stop some people from trying to join the table? I have found that the same person tries to join more avidly if you DO reject them PS sorry saw 100 posts thought the number was binary sorry...... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1eyedjack Posted March 28, 2004 Author Report Share Posted March 28, 2004 WE all know what to expect when "expert only" is written Right on! (sorry JRG). It means "Random game coming up" :-) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slothy Posted March 29, 2004 Report Share Posted March 29, 2004 Right on! (sorry JRG). It means "Random game coming up" :-) LOL monocled Jack .... you read too many posts... ;) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
irdoz Posted March 29, 2004 Report Share Posted March 29, 2004 A few comments on reading through this thread.. I understand the reasons for restriction lists on topflight and the beginner/intermediate lounge... both groups serve a particular and for me, worthwhile, function. I also understand the TD enemies list..not allowing their 'enemies' to play in their events but I would not like to see these lists have any use beyond that. However, I get uncomfortable with some other restrictions that exist in clubs on BBO and that TDs implement..they seem to go against some of the democratic and equitable philosophies of the internet. I'm not out to have a dig at anyone..but for example some clubs only allow entry based on personal referral. I'd be more comfotable if they exlcuded based on behabvioural criteria rather than entry based on who you randomly happen to know. And TD's excluding beginners or private...I can understand the motivation but these categories are totally meaningless and self-assigned... and take one second to change. This sort of restriction only encourages people to change their self-assigned ranking. And Im not sure what message it sends excluding beginners from tournaments. The 'private' thing amuses me. I see all the time in the lobby typed 'no private stats' - a hangover from okbridge. Given the so called 'stats' on BBO are all self-assigned and need to be interpreted very broadly and with some scepticism the notion that you would exclude people because they are hiding their own meaningless self-assigned rating is humorous. I have a few friends who say 'private' in their rating precisely because they realize the self-assigned assessments are meaningless. As one friend said 'if i put what I am according to BBOs criteria I am intermediate...but if I use the self-assigned rating methods that most seem to apply here I am expert. And there's so many "world class" players on here there must be a Bermuda Bowl every week...I refuse to lie.' And for choosing not to misstate their rating like thousands of others they get excluded from tournaments. Too funny. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1eyedjack Posted March 29, 2004 Author Report Share Posted March 29, 2004 I agree with much of what irdoz has to say, with the exception that however illogical, unfair or downright immoral a restriction might be I would fight to support the ability of sub-clubs or tourneys to set whatever totally automomous rules and regulations (not in conflict with the principal laws of bridge) that they wished, and for whatever reasons they chose. That would include excluding members on whatever criteria, charging a fee for membership, inclusion solely on recommendation if they wished, introduction of independent ranking systems (however computed, at the club's discretion) and so on. If the groundswell of opinion is, as I would hope, in line with irdoz then market forces will see that the unpleasant restrictions will not survive. The Internet is a great "democratizer". In all areas you survive or fail purely on the support of the remote users who are attracted to your site, club or whatever. It is precisely for that reason that there is no need for rules. Personally, the single most influential reason why I put "Private" as my ability is so that I don't get to play at tables that find that practice objectionable. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slothy Posted March 29, 2004 Report Share Posted March 29, 2004 The table description is only visible if you run full screen. Else you dont see the table description unless you set your pointer to the table and not the players - especially not to an empty seat. I think it is here the information is needed - but NOT displayed. The last modifications for the client has changed nothing here - except you will be running full screen. Dear Claus, I shall try and write this with an injection of humour to try and partially detoxify some of the venom that may be ejaculated in what i am going to say. Whether it will work or not is debatable! There are very few posts submitted by you that i have incidentally stumbled upon that in some way are not hypercritical (i use the prefix hyper very validly) of the software, either directly or implicitly. I am not sure whether it is your command of English (this i doubt very much as you seem quite fluent when you want to be and you only make a few mistakes - like forgetting that the pronouns God and Fred (peace be upon him) are interchangeable :P ) or whether by writing in a foreign language you lose a certain decorum in how you express yourself and are totally oblivious to what others may read into what you write ... Having read some of the archives (well not that old) it seems that Fred had a rather similar attitude to me and you didnt seem to take on board what he was saying. i felt that i had a rather perverted and misplaced duty to remind you.... I am trying not to be judgemental (seems like on this front i failed miserably huh?)- only asking you to be a bit more discreet. I have read your posts that over and over again seem to suggest that you are either unhappy with the software(forget this one it is timid in comparison) or believe you can do a better job. There is nothing wrong in perhaps occasionally (well once even ) to give Fred a pat on the back (not too hard, dont want to crack his vertebrae ;) ) and commend him for something that others have done with a more selfish and commercial will. I think it is unintentional. If not, then this post is more than justified. If it is, I am just asking you, Claus, to be more aware of how what you write is interpreted by others and that ones use of words and tone projects ones willingness to be a co-operative member of a forum, supported and funded no less by the people you are unintentionally (and i think it is) excoriating... sorry but i have read one post too many :( Alex Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spwdo Posted March 29, 2004 Report Share Posted March 29, 2004 The table description is only visible if you run full screen. Else you dont see the table description unless you set your pointer to the table and not the players - especially not to an empty seat. I think it is here the information is needed - but NOT displayed. The last modifications for the client has changed nothing here - except you will be running full screen. Dear Claus, I shall try and write this with an injection of humour to try and partially detoxify some of the venom that may be ejaculated in what i am going to say. Whether it will work or not is debatable! There are very few posts submitted by you that i have incidentally stumbled upon that in some way are not hypercritical (i use the prefix hyper very validly) of the software, either directly or implicitly. I am not sure whether it is your command of English (this i doubt very much as you seem quite fluent when you want to be and you only make a few mistakes - like forgetting that the pronouns God and Fred (peace be upon him) are interchangeable :P ) or whether by writing in a foreign language you lose a certain decorum in how you express yourself and are totally oblivious to what others may read into what you write ... Having read some of the archives (well not that old) it seems that Fred had a rather similar attitude to me and you didnt seem to take on board what he was saying. i felt that i had a rather perverted and misplaced duty to remind you.... I am trying not to be judgemental (seems like on this front i failed miserably huh?)- only asking you to be a bit more discreet. I have read your posts that over and over again seem to suggest that you are either unhappy with the software(forget this one it is timid in comparison) or believe you can do a better job. There is nothing wrong in perhaps occasionally (well once even ) to give Fred a pat on the back (not too hard, dont want to crack his vertebrae ;) ) and commend him for something that others have done with a more selfish and commercial will. I think it is unintentional. If not, then this post is more than justified. If it is, I am just asking you, Claus, to be more aware of how what you write is interpreted by others and that ones use of words and tone projects ones willingness to be a co-operative member of a forum, supported and funded no less by the people you are unintentionally (and i think it is) excoriating... sorry but i have read one post too many :( Alex alex, in the days /moths /years to come can u send me a copie of your texts before posting it so if i totally agree(like this one) i ask u to add my name to it so save some serverspace cause BABY you took the words right out of my mouth(translated anyways) marc Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
inquiry Posted March 29, 2004 Report Share Posted March 29, 2004 The table description is only visible if you run full screen. Else you dont see the table description unless you set your pointer to the table and not the players - especially not to an empty seat. I think it is here the information is needed - but NOT displayed. Claus, I get the table description in full screen, minimized, wide view, or not wide view. That is, on my computer, it doesn't really matter what setting I have the software on.... I think this is a function of the resolution you are running at... If you computer supports higher resolutions try changing your resolution. Also, go the main bridge room and try some variations of Control-V, each time you push it, the display should change. One of the displays is the old 640x480 I guess, and there you will not see the table description unless you are in the "wide" mode. but if you toggle to the higher resolution setting, it works wide or not, and expanded vertically or not. So not to see the description in the "not wide" mode is a failure of your computer's resolution not the software, or a failure of you to realize that you can change these settings. Hope this helps anyone wanting to see the description. But sadly, too few people use them (see "experts only") most frequently, like that request means anyting. :-) Ben Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
csdenmark Posted March 29, 2004 Report Share Posted March 29, 2004 Thank you Ben - I have it now! I delete my post to avoid somebody to get confused by my mistake. Sorry Alex and Marc. Too many crucial and important words in your postings I dont understand. Hopefully I will find time to look them up in my dictionary. Basically my views are to be critical to all. The only real way to test something new - not only on BBO - but in life as a whole. My attitudes are not hostile to BBO - of course not. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JRG Posted March 30, 2004 Report Share Posted March 30, 2004 For what it is worth. I don't think Claus is being hypercritical. I think he has a software development background as do I. When you have been involved in software development, you KNOW that developers need feedback when something is not working (or appears not to be working); otherwise, the bugs are never eradicated (testing is a part of the job that most programmers seem to hate the most and they are usually grateful for all the help they can get). He is also trying, though his English is not perfect, to give constructive criticism. I'm sure I have seen Claus drop the odd compliment as well (perhaps he could drop a few more -- perhaps he will!). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
csdenmark Posted March 30, 2004 Report Share Posted March 30, 2004 This thread is not about me - but for some kind of clarification I try this. My background is creativity. The methods to create new ideas to enhance the way we are doing right now. To handle such - which the world urgent needs and most people prefer to avoid - you need to be critical to everything. In danish "tvivl på alt" and in translation something like "doubt on everything - dont trust your ideas - test them ". To be annoyed with present solutions is the only way possible to pave the way for other ideas. When you have the ideas on table you need to test them. Not all ideas worth implementing - but you need to create and to test before assessment. I have a background in economy, organization(re-enginering) and computing. To work with creativity you need basic skills in many ways, pschycology, sociology, economy, statistics, computing, language, literature. Nearly everything you can think of you need some knowledge about - not deep of course - but enough to have a meaningful conversation with all people who are experts(deep knowledge) about their skills. You need to be able to find weak points in order to start a process where the experts can take advantage from their deep knowledge to the benefit of us all. Thats basic of all kind of invention. I use my skills and habits in life in general. Therefore you will often see my arguments as unpleasant ones - but normally also making a difference whether stated or not. I know many are getting upset - so now you have some explanation. I also know I sometimes am unfair to some - and as soon I realize such they will have an unconditional apology from me at once. - I think I make more apologies than most. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Judy_ Posted March 30, 2004 Report Share Posted March 30, 2004 I think I have recently discovered some reasons for some rejections, which is nice to know since I get rejected sometimes. If you are host and need two or three people, and you get several people asking to join at the same time, when you accept one the others get rejected even though you aren't rejecting them and you want them to play. And if you have just one seat available and while accepting the first person several others ask to play, then they are rejected. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blackest_k Posted March 31, 2004 Report Share Posted March 31, 2004 I think the current system is the best way it may not be polite but it doesn't give the opportunity to be impolite either. unlike this forum :) Idea's are sometimes good sometimes bad but they all can be useful to help fred towards building an ideal software environment for us to play bridge. with a complex product like the bridgebase software there are many area's it could be grown, refined, expanded. It is natural for the focus of a forum like this to focus on the negative since these are the area's that may be selected for the next round of improvements. If someone raises a point about a negative aspect of the software it's not an attack on fred it's just something which could be refined once the current crop of bugs are dealt with if it's important enough or trivial to change. Fred is an artist, just like an author a painter a musician and he wants to create great software i am sure he appreciates the work he doesnt have to do because of this forum :) I have yet to see anything written with malice intended about the software. warm regards john Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dodzi Posted April 10, 2004 Report Share Posted April 10, 2004 I am beginning to think that it is only those who are patently not experts that claim to be so. Having been paired up with so many 'experts' in tourneys that can barely follow suit I now virtually ignore it. How about a 'private only' tournament? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gweny Posted April 10, 2004 Report Share Posted April 10, 2004 Thank you all for very very fun and laughing thread. I nominate Slothy for official BBO Giggle maker! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hallway Posted April 11, 2004 Report Share Posted April 11, 2004 AISHA - rejected - no !! To be rejected is to be turned away. A daily occurrance to be sure - BUT - you were accepted , only to be found to have skills far beyond those of the average BILlie - you were given the greatest accolade we can bestow - you GRADUATED. It is the BIL's singular goal to have all our members GRADUATE - your name will be forever amongst the earliest of these. ;) We dream of the day when one of our Graduating members makes it into the Top Flight . :) Aim high that could be you !!! You could start a trend - the BIL could become famous as a breeding ground for Top Flighters :D Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
McBruce Posted April 12, 2004 Report Share Posted April 12, 2004 Perhaps soon someone will start a tournament series that uses deals which are set up to find out who the experts are: --restricted choice situations will never work--any hand which comes down to a choice between a squeeze and a finesse will always be makable only by the finesse--hands on which the expert might consider a strategic cuebid will be opposite hands which will never stop bidding once they hear that specific cuebid--liberal preempts that experts only have the guts to try will be inserted into hands where even a rookie would double and get 1100 without much effort No, please -- I'm not serious! :) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spwdo Posted April 12, 2004 Report Share Posted April 12, 2004 No, please -- I'm not serious! :D hi ok i trust you on this one lol:) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hotShot Posted April 20, 2004 Report Share Posted April 20, 2004 Perhaps soon someone will start a tournament series that uses deals which are set up to find out who the experts are: --restricted choice situations will never work--any hand which comes down to a choice between a squeeze and a finesse will always be makable only by the finesse--hands on which the expert might consider a strategic cuebid will be opposite hands which will never stop bidding once they hear that specific cuebid--liberal preempts that experts only have the guts to try will be inserted into hands where even a rookie would double and get 1100 without much effort No, please -- I'm not serious! :) :) And i thought i played those all the time :lol: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sfbp Posted May 2, 2004 Report Share Posted May 2, 2004 a quick suggestion (maybe this needs to be cross-posted to the software suggestions/discussions section, as a newbie here I dunno how to do this) there is a genuine problem with rejecting people, especially when a whole BUNCH show up at once (incidentally the close and reject all option frequently doesnt work!), it is one of time. Poor table host cannot do so many things at once. But if he had a LIST of refusal reasons, I imagine it might help. Some people are just rude, and it wouldn't help those. Some players need to be refused, and it wouldn't help that situation. 2 more thoughts: a. good players should be honest about their skill level (it is really silly to reject someone simply because their skill level says "novice" when they are just being coy) b. blacklisted (enemy) players should be automatically rejected - though there is no reason to tell them why. Stephen Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dogsbreath Posted May 2, 2004 Report Share Posted May 2, 2004 JRG is correct in his note on the 'rejection' problem.. some of you may not have experienced this, but when y get a flood of requests it is currently impossible to do anything in the way of giving explanation to those refused.. Setting table invisible etc doesnt help much of the time ..because often dont get enough warning of a player leaving ..or dont remember (my problem). The 'accept/reject' dialogue box seems to always have 'focus' ..so other actions are difficult. Also puts host in position of having to choose.. Also I rarely remember that I have become host 'cos of the original host has left. Dont know what the possible solutions are, from a software point of view. I would prefer to leave my table open (unrestricted) but this has caused problems also ..i have a list of people that i dont encourage to join 'cos i know they leave abruptly if they dislike something .I also feel uneasy if I dont accept the first player 'cos a latter request looks more interesting ;) regds Dog :rolleyes: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.