Abuse of Freedom By Tourney Director

[sniwas1]

I experienced something extraordinary in BBO, which I wish to share with you all. The purpose is to share views in the context of what happened in a particular case, details of which are as below.

Myself and my partner 'yasmin' were registered for a tourney rin BBO recently. After registering us, I had logged out of BBO, as I had to attend to something and as 14 mins were still left for the tourney to start. When I logged back in BBO, my pard told me that, perhaps I was too late as our registration was cancelled while I was away. I immediately checked if tourney had started already. But I found that, there were still 4 mins to go before it could start. We were surprised. I tried to re-register us, but then maximum number of registered players had been reached and so I could not re-register us. While I was telling this to my partner, the tourney started. I then got in chat the Tourney Director, who was conducting the tourney and asked her how our registration was cancelled. She told me that, if a pair is offline 2 mins before tourney start time, the pair gets removed to accomodate other pairs. I told her that, I had logged back in 4 mins before tourney start time and my pard was all the time logged on in BBO. So we both were in BBO 4 mins before tourney start time. On that, her reply was that, the pairs are removedby BBO and not by her and so it is not in her hands.

To ascertain the correct position and also as we thought that, in the context of the policy regarding removal of already registered pairs as explained by the Tourney Director, we should not have been removed from the Tourney, I wrote to BBO administration requesting BBO administration to look into this cancellation of registration for no fault on our part and causing us a lot of inconvenience. We felt that, as we plan our time to play in tourneys, if such is the action taken by either Tournament administrators or BBO, which causes wastage of time of members, then it's bad and needs to be looked into and the situation corrected forthwith.

 

BBO 's reply was as under:

 

"BBO doesn't clear offline players. In your case TD did it.

 

But we believe in letting the free market forces determine which tourneys are worth joining, which aren't. This is especially true for the free tourneys.

 

The player always has the right to choose which tourney he wants to play or help out in. Similarly, TDs can adjust their rules (some never adjust anything, time or whatever), they can be sterner or nicer, etc. They can choose to direct for just their friends, or for everyone.

 

We interfere only if the TD is doing something wrong like giving their friends top boards. So if this isn't the case here, please try to join other tourneys in the future if you don't like this TD's style."

 

I informed BBO about my disappointment regarding the above reply from BBO. Main reason for my disappointment was that, it was clear from BBO's reply that, although cancellation of our tourney registration was done by TD of the Organisers of the tournament, the TD was telling me that, BBO had done it and that, nothing was in her hands. This was nothing but utter falsehood,as is clear from BBO's reply. The TD had put the blame for the wrongful action on the part of BBO instead of admitting wrong action, which was on their part. And again, in spite of this happening, BBO, it appears, did not think that, TD had done something wrong. Is telling falsehood not far more serious than wrong actions on the part of TD like giving top board to ther friends? The question here is not only of joining or not joining tourneys conducted by a particular Tourney Director, but is of whether such falsehood on the part of TD, when it comes to light, should be condoned by BBO or should be dealt with strictly by BBO, so that, such instances don't recur in future. Such instances will contnue to occur, if this tendency of falsifyig facts, which is nothing but irresponsible behavior, is not checked by BBO expediously. I, therefore, am of the firm opinion that, BBO frame some specific guidelines/rules for conduction of tourneys in BBO by Individuals/Organisations/Clubs, flouting of which should attract severe penalties. A number of such issues might have come to BBO's knowledge in the past. Taking into account these, such guidelines need to be framed or if some guidelines are already existing, they need to be suitably modified, so that, such injustice is not meted out to BBO members and image of BBO is also not unnecessarily tarnished in the eyes of its members in future.

 

The present case is a straighforward case of deceipt of BBO members and of maligning the image of BBO at the same time without any justification. It is a case of 'Abuse of Freedom granted by BBO in good faith for fair conduction of tourneys in BBO.' It is necessary that, BBO administration,recognizing the value of time of its members and of the necessity of maintaining certain standards to be observed at the site being administered by itself, insists upon Tournament Organisers to respect these too.

 

I hope that, this incident serves as an eye opener for those who have concern about BBO's image and fair play in conduction of tourneys in BBO.

 

Tanks ALL.

 

sniwas1

[Phil]

You are a true freedom fighter.

 

Someone cue the Battle Hymn of the Republic please.

[helene_t]

I think a complaint to the TD suffices.

 

Some TDs prune offline players in order to avoid empty seats at the beginning. It's a legitimate cause. Maybe the start time was advanced by two minutes just after you were removed. Or maybe it was a mistake.

[Echognome]

1. It seems that the TD has a prudent policy. If the TD can replace missing pairs before the tourney starts, then there will be less of a hassle at the start of the tournament with substituting missing players and it will be more enjoyable for everyone.

 

2. There are many, many tournaments that occur on BBO all the time. How put out were you that you had to wait until the next tournament?

 

3. If you were just going to be away for a brief amount of time, why did you log off? Why not just click on that little box on your profile that says "Be Right Back"?

 

4. I personally think of this talk of deceipt by BBO is nonsense. I think you were put out, because you had a TD that actually does work in order to make their tournaments more enjoyable! Suppose you play in the tournament where the TD doesn't care. Let's the tourney start with offline pairs. About 10 tables start with missing players. Maybe the TD let's the players sort out their own subs, but this doesn't happen. So the tables are sitting there not being able to play. Now BBO is hearing complaints that the TD is doing nothing. Just be grateful you have a TD willing to work!

[sniwas1]

1. It seems that the TD has a prudent policy. If the TD can replace missing pairs before the tourney starts, then there will be less of a hassle at the start of the tournament with substituting missing players and it will be more enjoyable for everyone.

 

2. There are many, many tournaments that occur on BBO all the time. How put out were you that you had to wait until the next tournament?

 

3. If you were just going to be away for a brief amount of time, why did you log off? Why not just click on that little box on your profile that says "Be Right Back"?

 

4. I personally think of this talk of deceipt by BBO is nonsense. I think you were put out, because you had a TD that actually does work in order to make their tournaments more enjoyable! Suppose you play in the tournament where the TD doesn't care. Let's the tourney start with offline pairs. About 10 tables start with missing players. Maybe the TD let's the players sort out their own subs, but this doesn't happen. So the tables are sitting there not being able to play. Now BBO is hearing complaints that the TD is doing nothing. Just be grateful you have a TD willing to work!

I am surprised that, you have not understood at all what I have said.

 

I have never said that, offline players should not be removed from registered list. If some specific time limit has been specified for this purose, it must be observed. When the time limit was to be 2 mins (as told by TD herself), and when both of us there 4 mins before tourney start time, there was no justification for our removal. This is the point.

And when this was told to TD, TD saying that, de-registration was done by BBO and not by TD was supplying false information, as BBO has clarified that, BBO plays no part in removal of pairs registered for a tourney. Is the behaviour of TD in the present case still justificable? If TDs go on doing this under BBO's name, when BBO is not involved, is it not abuse of freedom, as BBO does not normally interfer in what TDs do?

Lastly, the statement that, 'I personally think of this talk of deceipt by BBO is nonsense' is arrogant. I have not said 'deceipt by BBO'. Here is no case of BBO deceiving. I have said 'deceipt of BBO members', which is not by BBO but by a TD. Would help if the post is read more carefully.

I am aware of the pains TDs have to take to conduct a tournament successfully. However, that does not mean that, some TDS can behave the way a TD did in the present case.

Lastly, If I were not in BBO for a while, my pard was there all the time. Before de-registering our pair, my pard could have been contacted by the TD before cancellation to assess the situation. Whether to remain logged in or whether to log out and relog in sufficiently prior to tourney start time is everybody's choice.

 

sniwas

[sniwas1]

I think a complaint to the TD suffices.

 

Some TDs prune offline players in order to avoid empty seats at the beginning. It's a legitimate cause. Maybe the start time was advanced by two minutes just after you were removed. Or maybe it was a mistake.

I wish to state as under.

 

I agree that a complaint to TD should suffice. I had initially complained to TD only. But her replies were not convincing and so I had to report to BBO.

 

I have no complaint at all about pruning offline players to avoid empty seats at start of tourney. But time limit specified fo the same should be strictly observed. In the present case, it was not observed. The start time was also not advanced by 2 mins as my verificaton of time left for start of tourney from the display had confirmed.

 

If it was a mistake, the same sould be accepted gracefully and not involve BBO unnecessarily by saying that, BBO did it and nothing is in my hands. If mistake was accepted gracefuly, I would not have approached BBO with a complaint, as I can understand that, mistakes do happen. But this was not done and over and above that, false information was provided, putting the blame on BBO unnecessarily in the process, which hurts.

 

Thank you for your kind post helen_t.

 

sniwas1

[TimG]

And when this was told to TD, TD saying that, de-registration was done by BBO and not by TD was supplying false information, as BBO has clarified that, BBO plays no part in removal of pairs registered for a tourney. Is the behaviour of TD in the present case still justifiable? If TDs go on doing this under BBO's name, when BBO is not involved, is it not abuse of freedom, as BBO does not normally interfere in what TDs do?

It does not matter whether the actions of the TD were justifiable, with few exceptions BBO lets TDs run their games as they see fit. Choosing whether and when to unregister players is something that is left to the TD.

 

Whether this TD lied about BBO's role is something that should be between the TD and BBO. If BBO is not concerned about the possible damage to their reputation, neither should you be.

[jillybean]

As far as I know the BBO software automatically de-registers incomplete pairs, offline players (indies) at the 1minute mark. BBO could have changed this now but thats how it has worked for as long as I can remember. Also, in survivor tournaments a pair can be registered, online and still dropped at the start if there is an uneven #pairs.

Anyway its a free tournament, bad luck you missed it - make sure you stay online next time.

[babalu1997]

hey

sniwas, how are you.

 

There are some advantages you get from playing at paid sites:

You can pre-register by email

You get your seat back

The tds keep a lid on rude opps

the customers keep a lid on rude tds

 

There are disadvantages too.

 

In free tourneys you get what you pay for.

 

do not plan your life around it and when the td boots you for false carding after their frisnds complain, you take it in stride.

[aguahombre]

At my tender age (65), I have developed a few pet peeves. One of them is what the OP is saying. Rather than explaining what occurred, and owning up to making a decision, the TD spouted off policy not related to the instant case, and blamed someone else for the action. I understand his ire, and his desire to vent it. Obviously, it is now water under the bridge.

[sniwas1]

And when this was told to TD, TD saying that, de-registration was done by BBO and not by TD was supplying false information, as BBO has clarified that, BBO plays no part in removal of pairs registered for a tourney. Is the behaviour of TD in the present case still justifiable? If TDs go on doing this under BBO's name, when BBO is not involved, is it not abuse of freedom, as BBO does not normally interfere in what TDs do?

It does not matter whether the actions of the TD were justifiable, with few exceptions BBO lets TDs run their games as they see fit. Choosing whether and when to unregister players is something that is left to the TD.

 

Whether this TD lied about BBO's role is something that should be between the TD and BBO. If BBO is not concerned about the possible damage to their reputation, neither should you be.

I am very disappointed to read this post. Because it is my firm view that, IT DEFINITELY MATTERs whether TD's actions are justifiable or not.

Everyone, including a TD, must be accountable for his actions.

TDs must have the freedom to run their games, but at the same time, they should be responsible to do it in a fair and transperant manner.

Whether and when to unregister a pair should be decided by TD but such an action should be subject to certain guidelines to be laid down by BBO.

These guidelines should be clear cut and specific. This will ensure uniformity in case of all tourneys.

 

I totally disagree that, the matter of falsehood is a matter only between BBO and the TD, because BBO members, in case of whom it happened,

are affected as well. It's a serious matter and needs to be dealt with as such. There needs to be accountability in such matters.

Being member of BBO, I consider that, my as well as BBO's image is important.

 

sniwas1

[lady_bb]

Sniwas1 is a Swangames.com regular member, where he frequently posts his lengthy opinions in what it’s called “Swan Message Board”, the majority admiring Laila’ work, who is Swan’s owner.

Swan is a small site, none of its tournaments are free, and they charge an extra fee, even to the regular members, to play in the ACBL tourneys. However, the site has not been updated for years and the technology is disgustingly poor.

Sniwas1 forgets that we must thank Fred Gitelman generosity and the generosity o f all the volunteer TDs who give their time for us to enjoy, for free, the game we like. Instead, he considers appropriate to bother BBO managers with personal problems and demands replies which are a loss of time.

If sniwas1 isn’t happy with what the volunteer TDs offer in the free tourneys, he could consider joining only the paid tourneys, same as he does in Swan.

[sniwas1]

As far as I know the BBO software automatically de-registers incomplete pairs, offline players (indies) at the 1minute mark. BBO could have changed this now but thats how it has worked for as long as I can remember. Also, in survivor tournaments a pair can be registered, online and still dropped at the start if there is an uneven #pairs.

Anyway its a free tournament, bad luck you missed it - make sure you stay online next time.

Please note the following please.

 

1. My self and my pard were in BBO, 4 mins before tourney start time.

 

2. BBO says that, we were not unregistered by BBO but by TD.

 

3. TD tells that, BBO unregisters offline pairs at the 2 min mark. We were there 4 mins before tourney start time. This means BBO can not have unregistered us. So it follows that, TD unregistered us. Means TD was misrepresenting facts in the present case. Should this be acceptable?

 

I am surprised if the contention is that in free tourneys all sorts of things are permissible. Whether free or paid, when a tourney is conducted, the same rules should apply. Tourney is a tourney.

 

Time is valuable. Unregistering a pair without sufficient reason must be viewed seriously. This should not depend upon luck, but upon satisfaction of certain specific criteria.

 

Freedom must be enjoyed with responsiblity.

 

Hope you will agree, jillybean.

 

sniwas1

 

sniwas1

[sniwas1]

Sniwas1 is a Swangames.com regular member, where he frequently posts his lengthy opinions in what it’s called “Swan Message Board”, the majority admiring Laila’ work, who is Swan’s owner.

Swan is a small site, none of its tournaments are free, and they charge an extra fee, even to the regular members, to play in the ACBL tourneys. However, the site has not been updated for years and the technology is disgustingly poor.

Sniwas1 forgets that we must thank Fred Gitelman generosity and the generosity o f all the volunteer TDs who give their time for us to enjoy, for free, the game we like. Instead, he considers appropriate to bother BBO managers with personal problems and demands replies which are a loss of time.

If sniwas1 isn’t happy with what the volunteer TDs offer in the free tourneys, he could consider joining only the paid tourneys, same as he does in Swan.

Many of us play at different bridge sites. I also do that. But that's not the point.

 

This post is trying to divert attention from the main issue for no reason. Instead of expressing or making suggestion on the point raised in my original post, extraneous issues are being brought in, whic are irrelevent in the present case.

 

I am not bothering BBO managers with my personal problems. What I experienced could be the fate of others as well. What I have tried to stress is that, TDs use their freedom with responsibility. OneTD did not do that in the case that has been cited. In order that, this type of incident does not recur in future, BBO may issue certain guidelines to be followed by TDs. I don't think I have suggested anything difficult to follow or anything against aybody. I appreciate the generosity of Mr. Fred Gitelman for developing this site so well. It is all the more necessary, therefore that, Organisers of Tourneys and TDs, who give their valuable time to condut tourneys, also do their best to adopt ways to conduct tourneys in the best possible manner. That's all. There should be transperancy in actions and rules being followed. Nothing more.

 

I don't have time to play bridge all the time as I have other things to attend to. So it is not worthwhile for me to become a paid member at more than one site.

 

sniwas1

[sniwas1]

hey

sniwas, how are you.

 

There are some advantages you get from playing at paid sites:

You can pre-register by email

You get your seat back

The tds keep a lid on rude opps

the customers keep a lid on rude tds

 

There are disadvantages too.

 

In free tourneys you get what you pay for.

 

do not plan your life around it and when the td boots you for false carding after their frisnds complain, you take it in stride.

Hi babalu:)

 

Nice to see you reacting on my post. Thank you.:))

 

What you say is perhaps right. However, I am sure, from your last statement, that, that, you are in general agreement with my post.

 

Hope we play someday soon.

 

sniwas1

[inquiry]

At the risk of stiking an inanimate equine, I will express my personal views.

 

1) The BBO response was correct, the software does not remove unregisted pairs, the TD did so.

 

2) The TD streched the truth, pushing the remove offline pairs maybe a tad bit earlier. But maybe you got back on line before the TD pushed that button. Maybe the TD was using Flash and forgot to update the info and maybe pairs who had been offlined and who signed back on was not reflected in the who is online and who is off.

 

3) This is hardly an issue deserving of emails to BBO, outcries of abuse to the TD, and long post in the forum. If you are unhappy with the way one or more TD's run their events, pick any of the other Free ones or pay-to-play ones. If you are unhappy with all of them, don't play in online tourneys on the BBO. There are other options on the BBO and elsewhere. There are several TD's for whom I will never play in their events, and so far this has not caused me any problems finding ones I will play in. I think you could easily find the same is true for yourself.

[sniwas1]

At the risk of stiking an inanimate equine, I will express my personal views.

 

1) The BBO response was correct, the software does not remove unregisted pairs, the TD did so.

 

2) The TD streched the truth, pushing the remove offline pairs maybe a tad bit earlier. But maybe you got back on line before the TD pushed that button. Maybe the TD was using Flash and forgot to update the info and maybe pairs who had been offlined and who signed back on was not reflected in the who is online and who is off.

 

3) This is hardly an issue deserving of emails to BBO, outcries of abuse to the TD, and long post in the forum. If you are unhappy with the way one or more TD's run their events, pick any of the other Free ones or pay-to-play ones. If you are unhappy with all of them, don't play in online tourneys on the BBO. There are other options on the BBO and elsewhere. There are several TD's for whom I will never play in their events, and so far this has not caused me any problems finding ones I will play in. I think you could easily find the same is true for yourself.

On reading your response, I wish to state as under:

 

1. If BBO'sresponse was correct and if BBO does not unregister offline pairs, is the TD's saying that, BBO removed us justified? Do you mean to say that, TD was not aware of what BBO software does or does not do?

 

2. You have indicated the possibility that, through some genuine mistake, our pair might have been unregistered. Well, I can understand that. But then it would have been proper on TD's part to tell me such possibility and not tell me that it's BBO who did it. If I were TD, I would have told whatever fact was and also say 'sorry for the inconvenience caused' or someting like that.

 

I have nothing against the TD, as I find that, the TD conducts the tourney in a very jovial way, which is very entertaining. However, this unregistration of our pair and supply of wrong information as to why it happened was very disturbing.

 

However, I must admit that, many of those who reacted to my post failed to see my main point which was of principle and of the need to take steps to improve matters, where need be. I find that, even the suggestion of reasonable regualtion of activities is shunned. In fact, we experienced what lack of adequate regulation leads to and yet, many of us seem to be averse to it.

 

sniwas1

[pokerbids]

Here is a truly extraneous matter but at the cost of incurring the posters “wrath” let me add my tuppence worth.

 

Situation (The early days of pokers marriage)

Pokers spouse- (with a loving caring smile at 8 am) Darling what time will you be back

Poker- 6 pm

Later - Same day 6-04 PM – Spouse takes a napkin and wipes the smile off her face as poker makes an appearance staggering a bit cause he stopped for “one for the road” on the way back home.

Spouse - Where were you? she asks poker

Poker - (In the early days of marriage “white lies” sort of seem ok). Daarling the traffic was diverted and we had to crawl on side roads – Hic Hic says poker inadvertently and the cat was out of the bag

 

Later same day poker’s wife writes a letter to her Mother in Law

-Your son is despicable and has been brought up badly and tells lies all day long!

-Mother In law letter back – It’s a gender thing Live with it

-Wife - I will not live with a badly brought up boy who drinks beer – Its your fault and the marriage is under threat because of you!

Mother In law back to spouse – But sweetie I wasn’t even there anyway what did he do

Pokers Spouse – He lied and drank beer

Mother In Law – But I only used to give him milk as a baby. You have corrupted him – Its your fault totally introducing him to beer – Bad Girl. You have forced him to lie

Spouse – I have not forced him to lie he is a born liar. He said something and did something else

Mother in law – If that is your major problem in your marriage consider yourself Lucky.

Spouse – He is lucky having a sweet girl like me as his spouse.

Mother in Law Make sure your sweetness doesn’t give him diabetes.

 

Poker sorts out this war of words and cuddling upto his spouse says “But darling you know I love you”

Pokers spouse - Men!!! Ok all is forgiven this once.

 

Sniwas its an extraaneous matter but there are parallels. It depends upon how flexible and fun loving you are. Uhhh take my advice and bend the principles a bit occasionally. 4 minutes and one tourney seems a big thing now. One beer and 4 mins seemed a big thing then. Many years later now we look back and laugh and the battle today is – How dare you put me in a hopeless slam with 2 aces missing. But darling I added an extra ace for your playing skill. Ok she says grumpily but I am going to write and tell your mother! You need 33 points she wags her fingers. Others need that I say I have a secret weapon for I have a brilliant spouse – Darrrrrling you are so cool she says…I love the way you bend your principle and cuddle up begging forgiveness…Poker - I am a man of principles and I don’t bend them I am just telling the truth babbles poker (in his mind saying that stupid dame took the finesse the wrong way and cant apply a simple squeeze). Pokers spouse (who has ESP) - And don’t give me a lesson on squeeze techniques cause I will squeeze your scrawny neck. Poker who never bends his principles does so this once (for the millionth time) cause he looks at the “overall picture” Sometimes it helps. Extraneous matter for sure but LIVE WITH IT. Yes Poker and his spouse too sometimes miss the main point cause they are so focused on the principles and each say to each other…On and on we go- I say if I were your wife I wouldn’t get headaches and she says If I were your husband I wouldn’t be such a constant headache…you say sorry …no its proper you say..No way you have no principles I am just trying to take steps and educate on how to improve and behave proper. No say poker I am doing precisely that. You are missing the point…you are missing the target. Behave properly…you behave properly or I will put arsenic in your food…You wouldn’t do that … Try me I would!!!!

 

Sometimes its good to miss the main point and look at the whole point Works in the marriage, works in the bridge partnership, works as a TD, works as a player. Capiche

[lady_bb]

I pointed out that sniwas1 is a regular Swangames member where he also posts long speeches mainly praising and thanking its owner, a lady called Laila.

 

It is a universal law, that it’s necessary to use the same rule to qualify persons, objects or events and most of all, human behaviors.

 

Sniwas accepts all the failures of the obsolete programs in Swangames, its paid TD’s private lessons offers, TDs who then direct the tournaments where these students participate, and even so, he pays a fee to play there.

 

On the contrary, he plays for free in BBO, and considers himself a full member with the capacity to criticize methods and volunteer TDs.

 

Sniwas pays to play in swan and profits, for free, of BBO’s advantages and generosity without thanking them.[/size]

[TimG]

This will ensure uniformity in case of all tourneys.

That would be a shame.

[uday]

afaik, we don't auto-unregister missing pairs before a tourney begins. We do toss out these pairs as the tourney begins, of course (ie, if you are not online when your T starts, you are unregistered).

 

I can understand why a TD would push the 'unregister missing pairs' button a couple of mins before T-start.

 

I can also understand OPs ire, but IMO, this was not a big deal. There are plenty of Ts, free and otherwise. Inappropriate use of the 'unregister missing pairs' button, if the term applies, is not a major transgression.

 

U

[sniwas1]

I pointed out that sniwas1 is a regular Swangames member where he also posts long speeches mainly praising and thanking its owner, a lady called Laila.

 

It is a universal law, that it’s necessary to use the same rule to qualify persons, objects or events and most of all, human behaviors.

 

Sniwas accepts all the failures of the obsolete programs in Swangames, its paid TD’s private lessons offers, TDs who then direct the tournaments where these students participate, and even so, he pays a fee to play there.

 

On the contrary, he plays for free in BBO, and considers himself a full member with the capacity to criticize methods and volunteer TDs.

 

Sniwas pays to play in swan and profits, for free, of BBO’s advantages and generosity without thanking them.[/size]

It seems lady_bb has ire against swan and is envious of its owner.

 

I don't wish to say more about her post, as it does not tackle the main issue but diverts to something irrelevent. I shall ignore her further posts if any.

 

sniwas1

[sniwas1]

afaik, we don't auto-unregister missing pairs before a tourney begins. We do toss out these pairs as the tourney begins, of course (ie, if you are not online when your T starts, you are unregistered).

 

I can understand why a TD would push the 'unregister missing pairs' button a couple of mins before T-start.

 

I can also understand OPs ire, but IMO, this was not a big deal. There are plenty of Ts, free and otherwise. Inappropriate use of the 'unregister missing pairs' button, if the term applies, is not a major transgression.

 

U

I am sorry, Uday, that, you have skirted the main issue.

 

sniwas1

[babalu1997]

 

 

U

I am sorry, Uday, that, you have skirted the main issue.

 

sniwas1

Sniwas, I do not understand what you think BBO should do.

 

Maybe the guy eliminated offline pairs at 4 minutes instead of 2 minutes. It has happened to me that I was eliminated because I lost connection at that crucial moment, and one time when I was at a teaching table and the tournament does not pull you from a teaching table.

 

The other day I believed i was signed up for a game and then i was not seated, the TD was puzzled too, bbo tds cannot pick and choose who to eliminate from a game.

 

I know you have a busy schedule, but really not much was lost, play some at the main club or something.

 

Even at paid sites sometimes tds are late, or their primitive software cause tournaments to assign pairs or movements wrong, and you might be in hurry to leave. Do you complain there?

 

Let it go, if God spare life there will be bridge tomorrow.

[Tola18]

Well said everyone!

 

Reading through this thread, I do have some comment.

 

As I understand Sniwas1 has two issues here:

 

1. The starting list had been cleansed from absent players not only the entirely accepted 2 minutes before, but perhaps even 4 minutes before.

Probably a minor matter, as a cleansing as such IS apparently useful.

 

2. The TD said the cleansing was automatic, while apparently it was not, TD did it himself. Thus a untruth, even a lie.

Telling untruth is never nice.

Thus, this is the major matter here.

 

Right?

 

Now.

 

We had seen in this thread, Sniwas1 is very polite, he does have a point, he may even be entirely right. But he does also have maany lenghy posts about an essentially minor cause. Even although everybody including several staff members very friendly assures him this is really not any big problem.

 

A not too daring guess is, Sniwas1 behaves something alike talking with that TD.

Of course, this is not easy for the TD. The TD is probably not idle waiting for pleasant chatting, but probably does several things at once, having to talk to several persons... (This is also probably the reason he did buyed himself some extra time by cleansing a little earlier than strictly necessary.)

Now. He is about to lauch the tournament, and so Sniwas1 comes in complaining. Leeenghy complaining.

I for one understand the TD telling in this situation a little white lie...

 

 

A speculation, but sounds for me very plausible. :)