[cherdano]

FrancesHinden, on Aug 30 2007, 11:10 AM, said:

fred, on Aug 26 2007, 12:09 AM, said:

For example, consider the host's ability to boot a player.

It could be argued that there are 3 reasons a table host might want to boot a player:

1) He has a bad connection
2) For social reasons
3) For bridge reasons

Perhaps the software can be designed to take care of 1).

It could be argued that giving a player the ability for boot for reason 2) does more harm than good.

And 3) is not acceptable according to our rules.

If you buy all that, then it could be argued that the host's ability to boot a player can be eliminated.

You said it's a big "if", and I don't buy it.

Currently the only times I play on BBO are practice games with three specified friends/teammates. When I did this the first time, I set up a new table and reserved the seats at the table for my friends.

This worked fine.

Then one of my friends got disconnected. Immediately someone else sat in his ex-seat, and ignored my request to leave/explanation of why he should leave, and I had to boot him/her to allow the reconnected friend to rejoin.

Now, I could have got round this by adding "permission required to join table" when I set the table up, but it's wasn't obvious that when you reserve seats they doesn't stay reserved until you say differently e.g. over a disconnect.

The point of all this rambling is that although you might argue in an ideal world the ability to boot is not required, when you have inexperienced people using your software who don't realise exactly what's required when setting a table up (e.g. that 'reserved' seats don't persist) you aren't in an ideal world.

Of course that is an example that could be taken care of with a better logic in the software, but I would also claim that no matter how good the software is, there are always decisions that someone at the table has to make.
Let's say someone's connection goes really badly and has no connectivity for 2 minutes. Do you want to wait, or look for someone else? Well if it is a serious practice game between 2 partnerships preparing for the Bermuda Bowl, they are probably willing to wait a couple of minutes more. If it is a quick pickup game, or the player who lost connectivity just announced it is his last board, or called one of the other players by phone telling that his network cable just burst into flame and won't be fixed until tomorrow, probably he should be booted right away...

[uday]

Y. The environment still has the notion of 'table host' and granting the power to boot etc is just a matter of adding it. What we're mulling over is whether that would overcomplicate the experience for most hosts.

[Dwingo]

Having the No. of Kibiitzers listed at the top of the Kibitzers column will be a nice feature to have.

[1eyedjack]

Dwingo, on Aug 31 2007, 08:19 AM, said:

Having the No. of Kibiitzers listed at the top of the Kibitzers column will be a nice feature to have.

Yes, and number of friends above the friends column. Dynamically updated. So whichever tab is NOT active, any changes in the underlying list are notified to the player without prompting.

[FrancesHinden]

I just used BBOTV to do a session of vugraph commentating and had a few (relatively minor) gripes compared to the current client.

1. When I started the chat window was pretty small left-to-right because of a very wide advert. This was extremely irritating, because there wasn't really enough room for the chat. I don't recall seeing an ad that shape in the usual client.

2. When someone talks to me, I often like to look at their profile before replying (not least to find out if I happen to know them or not). I also sometimes look at another commentators profile to find out who they are. To look at their profile I have to click on their name, and then the 'chat' box defaults to their userid; to chat to the entire table I have to go to the drop-down box on the left and scroll down until I find '---Table' which is a bit of a pain; in the current client 'chat' defaults to chatting to the entire table.

3. (related to 2). If I just wave the mouse around in the chat window, it defaults to a click meaning chat-to-the-first-named-person-in-the-chat-window. It would be great if, instead, just clicking in the chat window not on a username gave me chat-to-table.

4. There seemed to be no way of telling which table of which vugraph event I was actually in. In the current client, the window title changes of course. But here the only way I can see the event and the table (open/closed) seems to be to look at the vugraph schedule and compare player names.

5. In the current client, hovering over the result in the other room gives the other room auction; I can't seem to do that here and need to go to the movie (I assume this is just something that will be implemented in due course).

6. Opening the myhands/movie always resets the 'other table' results to board 1. Would be nice if it defaulted to the current hand.

[zielona]

Hi

Firstly, congratulations. Brilliant look and feel, very smooth.

I spent some time on BBOTV yesterday while unable to connect from the window client. Apologies if any of the comments have already been made.

1) Agree with FrancesHinden regarding the chat drop down. I accidently talked to a vugraph operator and an opp from the previous table because their names were left as defaults in the drop down.
The default should be Table, or Kibitzers where applicable.
2) Names are added to the drop down regardless if I ever clicked at them or not, simply because they are in the table chat area. Is it necessary? They stay there even when I move to another table.
3) Are there plans to introduce some keyboard shortcuts? Eg tabbing across the screen. It would be good to be able to tab to the chat drop down and then further to the chat message area, instead of having to use the mouse.
4) Not sure if many people would agree here but I would like to see multiple
chat message areas - configurable to 3, 2 or 1. I often type something longer to one person - or tournament - but have to interrupt to quickly respond to someone else.
5) Thank you for allowing to see the profile of offline players!!
6) E-mail information (from the profile) is missing. This is where most people put important information about their systems (No transfers!) or some helpful info about where they are or who they are (15 yr old bridge addict).
7) Adding to the boot-or-not-to-boot discussion, booting is required when someone becomes rude or falls asleep.
8) Table score has the aggregate result only. Windows client allows you to see last hand result in brackets.

That's all for now. I surely will have more comments when tourneys are added.

[han]

I don't know if this has been spotted yet:

When chatting on BBOtv the target can suddenly change. I was chatting with friend A and suddenly I would say something to friend B (with whom I chatted earlier). This hasn't been painful yet but could be!

edit: I was told that I probably clicked on a name in a list by accident. That's possible.

[1eyedjack]

Hannie, on Sep 3 2007, 11:11 PM, said:

I don't know if this has been spotted yet:

When chatting on BBOtv the target can suddenly change. I was chatting with friend A and suddenly I would say something to friend B (with whom I chatted earlier). This hasn't been painful yet but could be! 

edit: I was told that I probably clicked on a name in a list by accident. That's possible.

I am inclined to agree that the chat bar is (for me) a bit frustrating. It may be something you get used to, and when used to it the frustration goes. It is the way that it remembers the last person to whom you sent chat and keeps that as the default for the next chat message. If that happens to be your intention (which is perhaps the majority case) then great. Otherwise it is a shade too long-winded changing the recipient, for my taste, and I have frequently typed what I thought was a reply to the last incoming message only to notice after sending that it went to the wrong place.

Perhaps it should default to the identity of last incoming message sender, not the last outgoing message recipient. If the last incoming message was addressed to a wider audience, such as table, or club, then the default outgoing message should perhaps default to the same wider audience, but if it was a private message then the default response would be a private message to that individual.

I don't think that is a perfect solution, and I am not sure that it is even an improvement - just an idea. I know that I don't much like the current solution.

Perhaps at the risk of cluttering up the window, have two rows of chat, so that you can set one as a "popular" recipient and the other as a dynamic one. Or simply have as many separate chat channels as you wish. They all have downsides, I guess. Maybe I just have to get used to the current method. Maybe there are some shortcut control-keys that I have not yet noticed.

I would quite like an option to chat to the whole table (including kibitzers) but EXLUDING partner. This is slightly different from chatting to both opponents. And this could perhaps be set as the default recipient during the auction or during the course of defensive play.

End of ramble.

[paulg]

FrancesHinden, on Sep 1 2007, 06:59 PM, said:

I just used BBOTV to do a session of vugraph commentating and had a few (relatively minor) gripes compared to the current client.

1. When I started the chat window was pretty small left-to-right because of a very wide advert. This was extremely irritating, because there wasn't really enough room for the chat. I don't recall seeing an ad that shape in the usual client.

On my 1024x768 screen the chat area/advert layout depends on the space allocated to BBOTV.

Specifically, by disabling toolbars in the (Firefox) browser I give more screen space to BBOTV and the advert changes to a smaller (narrower) size and I get a chat area that is much more acceptable.

Paul

[dosxtres]

I cant log in some computers that are behind a firewall and some other stuff.
I have my BBO client at home, but, when i'm not at home, what i really want to do is watching vugraph.

When a I saw there was a BBOTV I thought i could have a look to vugraph. But not.

Could be a BBOTV without a lot of features, but easy to get there and watching vugraph in any computer without hard software/hardware requirements for that people who only want to watch the vug?

Kind regards,

[helene_t]

zielona, on Sep 2 2007, 02:17 AM, said:

6) E-mail information (from the profile) is missing. This is where most people put important information about their systems (No transfers!) or some helpful info about where they are or who they are (15 yr old bridge addict).

Unlike the Windows client, bbotv runs inside a browser, and furthermore anonymous login is possible. This means that the bots that collect email addresses for spammers may use bbotv. So anonymous users should probably not be allowed to see email addresses.

Ultimatively I think users should be allowed to leave the eamil field (or other fields) blank, thereby trading it for an extra line of "general" profile info.

[fred]

helene_t, on Sep 4 2007, 10:42 AM, said:

zielona, on Sep 2 2007, 02:17 AM, said:

6) E-mail information (from the profile) is missing. This is where most people put important information about their systems (No transfers!) or some helpful info about where they are or who they are (15 yr old bridge addict).

Unlike the Windows client, bbotv runs inside a browser, and furthermore anonymous login is possible. This means that the bots that collect email addresses for spammers may use bbotv. So anonymous users should probably not be allowed to see email addresses.

Ultimatively I think users should be allowed to leave the eamil field (or other fields) blank, thereby trading it for an extra line of "general" profile info.

Actually the reason we decided to leave out the field for e-mail address is that it is pretty much useless. Most people do not include their real e-mail addresses in the Windows client and many people who do later regret it.

Yes it is true that there is not enough space in the "other" area for people to include everything they might want to say about themselves, but using the e-mail field to help get around this is not the proper solution to that problem.

I think it is likely that we will eventually allow more space for "other" and/or allow people to use html in this area (so that they can include links and possibly pictures if they want).

I have been at a tournament during the past week and I tend to avoid "real work" when I am playing - I have learned the hard way that mixing bridge and business has an adverse effect on my results at the table

That is why I have not made any recent responses to posts in this thread, but there has been a lot of good feedback while I was away (thanks!). I will need a day or 2 to get caught up on my e-mail, but I expect to get back to work on BBOTV soon. Probably I will not go back and respond to very many of the recent posts, but I have read them all and I really appreciate the many helpful comments and suggestions.

Fred Gitelman
Bridge Base Inc.
www.bridgebase.com

[bid_em_up]

1eyedjack, on Sep 4 2007, 03:03 AM, said:

I would quite like an option to chat to the whole table (including kibitzers) but EXLUDING partner. This is slightly different from chatting to both opponents. And this could perhaps be set as the default recipient during the auction or during the course of defensive play.

hehe, i kinda like this idea also.

[jtfanclub]

bid_em_up, on Sep 4 2007, 09:30 AM, said:

1eyedjack, on Sep 4 2007, 03:03 AM, said:

I would quite like an option to chat to the whole table (including kibitzers) but EXLUDING partner.  This is slightly different from chatting to both opponents.  And this could perhaps be set as the default recipient during the auction or during the course of defensive play.

hehe, i kinda like this idea also.

I third the motion. Especially important when I explain a bid at length to the opponents...I'd like there to be some evidence of this beyond scrounging through log files.

[bid_em_up]

jtfanclub, on Sep 4 2007, 10:12 AM, said:

bid_em_up, on Sep 4 2007, 09:30 AM, said:

1eyedjack, on Sep 4 2007, 03:03 AM, said:

I would quite like an option to chat to the whole table (including kibitzers) but EXLUDING partner.  This is slightly different from chatting to both opponents.  And this could perhaps be set as the default recipient during the auction or during the course of defensive play.

hehe, i kinda like this idea also.

I third the motion. Especially important when I explain a bid at length to the opponents...I'd like there to be some evidence of this beyond scrounging through log files.

Unfortunately, while I "really" like the idea, and it is one that could certainly be useful, a little more consideration prompts me to believe that it just isn't practical.

I have a hard enough getting opponents to understand that alerts made in the bidding box are not visible to partner. They get mad about it, fuss, cuss, yell, holler, etc. that it is unethical to "self-alert". Sad, but true. Most of these folks are computer illiterate and do not understand the online environment.

Can you imagine the hassle of getting them to understand that partner cannot see your chat? Especially when they, in turn, start responding in kind to where the whole table sees it, making partner now aware of what you said anyway?

While the average forum poster can appreciate this idea, in practice, I do not know if it could actually work.

[zielona]

Somehow I cannot imagine why I would need to chat to opps and kibitzers at the same time.

But chat to both opps is a must. However, it would also be nice to somehow indicate to them that both are getting the message - different arrow perhaps? Unfortunately the window client doesn't give you this information (I think).

[bid_em_up]

Finally took BBOTV for a test drive last night, I encountered the following issues which may or may not have already been mentioned:

1) I could chat to a player in a tournament while kibbing them.
2) I could log into BBOTV with a different ID while logged into BBO Windows client under this ID.
3) I attempted to establish a table using the "partner/opponents" option. All of these players were playing elsewhere at the time. It would not create the table, it simply told me "Player X not available". This could be frustrating in that many times people are already playing at one table, but we are trying to establish a new table for them to join.
4) I must be dumb. I could not figure out how to add anyone to friends list.
5) Ad window too large and/or chat window too small. The chat area on my screen was approximately 2" across while the ad area encompassed the other 12" of the bottom of the screen. (Dont ask me what my video resolution was, I don't know....would have to check).
6) This may not be functional, but I could not find a list of tables in play?
7) Friends list was in one LONG scroll bar, instead of muti-column. This is fine if you have only a few friends in your list, but being able to view them all at once in a columnar format is much more practical, imo.

Overall, I was generally pleased though.

Thats all for now.

[barmar]

bid_em_up, on Sep 5 2007, 11:17 AM, said:

4) I must be dumb. I could not figure out how to add anyone to friends list.

Click on their handle somewhere, or enter it in the Find box, to display their profile. Then click on either Neutral, Friend, or Enemy to change their status.

Quote

5) Ad window too large and/or chat window too small.  The chat area on my screen was approximately 2" across while the ad area encompassed the other 12" of the bottom of the screen. (Dont ask me what my video resolution was, I don't know....would have to check).

You can resize most of the areas of the window by clicking on the divider and dragging it.

Quote

6) This may not be functional, but I could not find a list of tables in play?

I don't think it's available yet.

Quote

7) Friends list was in one LONG scroll bar, instead of muti-column.  This is fine if you have only a few friends in your list, but being able to view them all at once in a columnar format is much more practical, imo. 

Widen that section and it will expand to two columns when they fit.

[bid_em_up]

barmar, on Sep 5 2007, 12:05 PM, said:

Quote

5) Ad window too large and/or chat window too small.  The chat area on my screen was approximately 2" across while the ad area encompassed the other 12" of the bottom of the screen. (Dont ask me what my video resolution was, I don't know....would have to check).

You can resize most of the areas of the window by clicking on the divider and dragging it.

Unfortuntely, you can change the size of the chat window vertically...but not horizontally. (You can increase/decrease its height, but not its width).

On my PC @ work, the size of the chat area is much better (2" ad, 12" typeable area) so it must have something to do with my display settings at home?

(Its also a different ad now....so the specific ad could have some bearing on this as well.)

Your suggestions did resolve #4 & 7, thx. Although I am pretty sure I did attempt to do what is required to add a friend last night. It was late though....so I could have done something wrong.

[bid_em_up]

A few other things I have noticed, again they may have been mentioned already:

No movie available.

No IMP score on table.
Edit: This apparently is dependent upon what table type you are kibitzing. If a regular table the IMP score is there, if it is a team game the IMP score is not there (for kibitzers).

No indication of last hand results on table.

Please change the chat area to white w/black text. This black on green is hard on the eyes. (yes, I realize that Fred has said that "colors" are not final and will probably be redesigned by a graphic artist of some sort. I just wanted to put my 0.02 in on that.

If possible, it would be nice to change the font color for different forms of chat, i.e. blue for kib chat, red for table chat, green for private chat, orange for chat from friends, etc. (or whatever color the user selects).

It would also be nice to be able to change all the colors ourselves, as in the current Windows client, but may not be possible.

If you scroll up in chat, it never automatically returns you to the "current" chat. You stay wherever you scrolled to until you manually scroll back down. I don't know if this is a good thing or a bad thing.....

I'm positive somebody mentioned this but....default chat should either be kibitzers or Table, and the two options should be at the TOP of the list, not the bottom. Currently, I get a list of all the people making comments, with Kibitzers and Table chat options at the bottom of the scroll list. This would be a pain if you had 200+ kibbers making comments. Preferably, just because somebody makes a comment, they do not show up in your chat window as a person to talk to.

I don't know why, but if I click into the chat area itself (not on a persons name), the chat default goes to one specific user, who I think might be the first person to chat when you signed on. It changes from Kibitzers, Table or whatever else I have selected in the chat scroll list, to this one particular person.
Edit: It defaults to the person you first chatted with.

Can you edit your profile yet?

Can you turn off chat from lobby or enemies?

Ok, I guess thats all for now.