BBO Upgraded: ACBL IT, Friends/Followed/Ignored Players

[Trump Echo]

When looking at "Hand and Results" / "Recent Hands" the current hand does not stay "lit" on the left side, causing you to lose your place on the list. This is new as of today. If I click it twice it seems better. But I prefer the way it was (yesterday).

 

Thanks

[Shilo_1]

Simply stated: Bridge is a social game. We sign into BBO to compete, flex our minds, and enjoy the wonderful people gathered here on any given day. I do believe this new was of "friends" verses followers verses ignore will not enhance this site or game for most of us. Sorry to see this change.

[Khrystyna]

My 2 cents- I am wondering what/who initiated this change to the Friends list? Was there a user survey taken? I used the list for marking players I enjoyed games with, "not bonded" friends. Now I had to get rid of this list as I will not "follow" anyone. That is creepy. What does it mean anyway- where am I following them to? Previously, if they signed on and I invited to play well and good, if they declined, tant pis. I am not interested in a slew of "bonded" friends. The system worked fine for both uses.

 

While on my soap box, another suggestion: get rid of the star "compatibility" system. There are many obnoxious players with lots of stars.

Further it messes up the registration desk- return to a plain alphabetical listing, with or w/o stars.

 

The Keep it Simple Management style works best.

[wynsten]

The "sound" option continues to re-assert itself across logoff-login while other options (like "pictures of cards") retain their most recent setting.

 

I have just one real "friend" in my "friends" list (someone I frequently partner with); the others are all "stars" that I follow. This would be true whether they had friended me back or not! And I know which are which, so this new feechur, which seems to offend many, is for me - at best - useless.

[wynsten]

 

 

While on my soap box, another suggestion: get rid of the star "compatibility" system. There are many obnoxious players with lots of stars.

Further it messes up the registration desk- return to a plain alphabetical listing, with or w/o stars.

 

Yeah - that feature is pretty useless too - since we have no idea on what it is based. Give me access to the raw data and let me decide for myself how "compatible" it makes us.

[FM75]

I like to have sound OFF and had it set that way in Options before the latest changes. Since the changes were implemented every time I log back in sound is turned back ON. Evidently the setting for sound on/off is not being saved properly.

 

Logoff after changing your settings. That has been mentioned several times and in many threads. Don't just click the X or close. Once you have saved your settings, then you can just close the window afterwards.

[matmat]

Personally, I'd like the option to not have my friends/follows split into two lists. (I honestly don't care whether others can see whether or not I've marked them as friends.) I'd like to return to the format of having one alphabetical list of all the people who are online who I have marked.

 

This.

Now we have to go through two lists to find a table to kib or (sometimes) play.

 

The whole concept of knowing who also has you friended can be problematic, too, as others have pointed out.

I, for one, have penciled down a few names now of people who I shall have to find at the next NABC and have a stern talking to...

 

If BBO chooses to keep the friends/followers split, I suggest also a list of "stalkers" who are people that we have marked to ignore/enemy and who have decided to follow us.

 

This way BBO will furnish us with the information necessary to retaliate against the ingrates who refuse to friend us and to protect ourselves against the stalkers with restraining orders....

[GreenMan]

If someone's going to pout and pule because I didn't follow them back, why should I care what they think?

[sfi]

Logoff after changing your settings. That has been mentioned several times and in many threads. Don't just click the X or close. Once you have saved your settings, then you can just close the window afterwards.

 

That doesn't work since the upgrade. I now have to turn the sound off every time I log in.

[gordontd]

That doesn't work since the upgrade. I now have to turn the sound off every time I log in.

Yes, I've found that too.

[wynsten]

Logoff after changing your settings. That has been mentioned several times and in many threads. Don't just click the X or close. Once you have saved your settings, then you can just close the window afterwards.

So don't you think that might indicate there really is a problem? Anyway, it's a small annoyance with an easy work-around, clearly a bug that will shortly be fixed.

[watchingtv]

Please discuss the latest version of BBO here.

 

Main changes are:

• ACBL Instant Tournaments
• Friends, Followed Players, Ignored Players

 

See release notes here.

The Robots in the acbl instant tournaments all bid differently for no apparent reason. This happens fairly regularly. I am going back to the regular acbl Robot tournaments until further notice

[the_clown]

I also think the friends/ followers "feature" is absolutely horrible and would be happy to see it rolled back. I have enjoyed almost all of the improvements of the web version in recent years, but this is really pretty bad IMHO.

[sner66]

The instant ACBL tournaments are very nice; main advantages are

1. No wait for next tourney to start

2. If you get called away from computer you do not have to worry about time

3. At "slow times" you don't have to decide between playing in a 6-person event or waiting 15 min for next tourney

4. Flexibility to pick between IMPs and mps

 

To those who think its not "real":

1. Really no difference than playing in live tourney; you are just "time-shifting" much like using a DVR for your favorite TV show; it's not a different show than had you watched it live. If the same players were playing these hands with you "live" you would achieve the same results.

2. Maybe GIB bid differently when tourney was first played but you know how GIB bids now and can take that into account. Much like saying you can only play with partner A because partner B bids differently. True, for a given hand, the A and B systems may give different results, but net/net it will average out between good/bad and no difference.

 

Good job BBO! (only downside is that in the two instants I've played--> the ghost of Leo past has been in both! :rolleyes: )

[barmar]

I like having that choice. The real downside is the changes in GIB creating a different result.

That's not new. The old Instant Tournaments had the same problem. When we first created ITs, we used tournaments from several years earlier, so there were lots of GIB changes. Over time we've added more recent tournaments to the database, so there have been fewer GIB changes.

 

I've found that sometimes this works in your favor, sometimes against. I haven't kept statistics, so I don't know how closely they cancel out. It feels like it works against more, but that may just be a subjective impression -- people tend to remember disasters more than successes.

[Bbradley62]

... I suggest also a list of "stalkers" who are people that we have marked to ignore/enemy and who have decided to follow us.

This should not be possible; if Mary marks John as "ignore", Mary should also automatically be removed/disallowed from John's "followed" list.

[barmar]

This should not be possible; if Mary marks John as "ignore", Mary should also automatically be removed/disallowed from John's "followed" list.

What's the point? Even if they're following you, they can't bother you because we block chat and email from enemies.

 

I think people who object to the privacy violation in the new friends/following distinction would consider the above even worse. If there's anyone you don't want to know about your preferences, it seems like it would be those you've marked as enemies.

[MrAce]

Oh well...I just lost a wife due to this new change when she saw i did not friend her but my ex was in my friend list. I also lost profit by losing my real life customers for not marking them as friend.

I will sue BBO. Someone has to pay my losses.

All made up and joke of course. http://www.bridgebase.com/forums/public/style_emoticons/default/tongue.gif And I personally like this new feature. But if I were decision maker in BBO, I would never let myself wide open to such kind of silly claims.

[MrAce]

I think BBO can solve this by simply adding another button which leaves the choice of using this feature to the user. This way people who thinks this is privacy issue can turn off this feature and people who likes it can let it on.

 

When it is off, people can not see your friend/follower preferences. This makes both worlds happy. No?

[barmar]

When it is off, people can not see your friend/follower preferences. This makes both worlds happy. No?

I'm not sure how that would work. Should there be a "Don't know" list? Then they'll know that you've turned on this option, which seems like another privacy violation.

[MrAce]

I'm not sure how that would work. Should there be a "Don't know" list? Then they'll know that you've turned on this option, which seems like another privacy violation.

 

No imo. Declaring that you do not allow people to see your preferences should not be a privacy violation. Just like some people like to share their email address on their card and some don't. Some people share their nationality and some don't. Just like some choose to show "private" for their skill level. If all these are not privacy issues, I can't see how this would be one. And if one chooses to allow this feature, then he has no reason to complain for.http://www.bridgebase.com/forums/public/style_emoticons/default/smile.gif

[Bbradley62]

I suggest also a list of "stalkers" who are people that we have marked to ignore/enemy and who have decided to follow us.

This should not be possible; if Mary marks John as "ignore", Mary should also automatically be removed/disallowed from John's "followed" list.

What's the point? Even if they're following you, they can't bother you because we block chat and email from enemies.

 

I think people who object to the privacy violation in the new friends/following distinction would consider the above even worse. If there's anyone you don't want to know about your preferences, it seems like it would be those you've marked as enemies.

I guess I failed to include the "hiding" suggestion in this previous thread:

http://www.bridgebase.com/forums/topic/63751-software-improvement-changes/page__p__766914__hl__stalker__fromsearch__1#entry766914

[scarletv]

I found a new bug in the friends list sorted for categories. When more friends are online as can be showed at once there is a scroll bar at the right side but disappears when trying to use it. In the end only some of the friends are shown not all. That problem is simultaneously to the one with multiple view of friends.

 

Additional the number of categorized friends/followers is not correct. So I will not see if someone is online out of categories where only followers are online? Absolutely not helpful and misguiding as I use categories to identify some players where I watch their play or lessons. Now I will no longer see when they are online without opening the category. I would really appreciate when you add the number of friends and followers that are shown in categories.

 

Obviously the status of the friends/followers is not updated when shown in categories. I have a lot where the status says "online" but when I open the profile it says "offline".

[johnu]

That's not new. The old Instant Tournaments had the same problem. When we first created ITs, we used tournaments from several years earlier, so there were lots of GIB changes. Over time we've added more recent tournaments to the database, so there have been fewer GIB changes.

 

I've found that sometimes this works in your favor, sometimes against. I haven't kept statistics, so I don't know how closely they cancel out. It feels like it works against more, but that may just be a subjective impression -- people tend to remember disasters more than successes.

 

On the reasonable assumption that new GIB releases fix bugs and make bidding and play improvements, every new GIB version should be expected to play better than the previous version. If you have to play against stronger GIBs, you aren't playing on a level playing field. Players should be informed about which GIB version was played in the tournament and given the option to choose whether they only want to play against the most recent tournaments played with the latest GIBs.

[Bbradley62]

Players should be informed about which GIB version was played in the tournament and given the option to choose whether they only want to play against the most recent tournaments played with the latest GIBs.

This is very simple... if you want to only play in tournaments involving the most recent GIBs, do not register for Instant Tournaments. It appears to me that every hour there are 16 BBO Robot Dupes (excluding the two free ones that fill up very quickly) plus 12 ACBL Robot Dupes.