[pirate22]

As FG has stated,there may have to be a clampdown,on abuse,and other factors when playing bridge,what is the reasoning behind persons arriving at the table with only the word "Private" and to boot no system stated,
Do these persons unknown, derive some perverted sense of excitement/pleasure,perhaps they dare not contribute to the FORUM,in case they are abused:)
We can all have a "NOM DE PLUME" to protect one's privacy,if necessary,
these privates are not welcomed at my table as a partner, nor as an opponent.
any seconders???

[jjbrr]

I think they just get on BBO to have a good time, and I suspect they don't much care about the results. I have no problem with this at all.

[matmat]

pirate22, on Jan 30 2010, 09:02 PM, said:

these privates are not welcomed at my table as a partner, nor as an opponent.
any seconders???

charming attitude. I'm sure i'll never find myself at your table on my own volition.

[helene_t]

I think it's ok not to advertise any personal details. Often they will answer if their partner ask about gender and country.

Some people want to protect their privacy. Some just can't be bothered. Some have insufficient computer skills to fill in their profile.

All fine with me.

BTW I have no personal details on my profile other than country, but if you want to know more you can just google on helene_t bbo. (If you google on helene_t only you will find some different people).

[glen]

helene_t, on Jan 31 2010, 07:41 AM, said:

I think it's ok not to advertise any personal details. Often they will answer if their partner ask about gender and country.

Some people want to protect their privacy. Some just can't be bothered. Some have insufficient computer skills to fill in their profile.

All fine with me. ...

This is all ok and fine with me too.

However social networking studies have shown that when real and full names are used (e.g. facebook compared to myspace), politeness increases. Thus while it is ok and fine to not disclose names, I think it is better than ok to have them.

[hotShot]

glen, on Jan 31 2010, 03:25 PM, said:

However social networking studies have shown that when real and full names are used (e.g. facebook compared to myspace), politeness increases. Thus while it is ok and fine to not disclose names, I think it is better than ok to have them.

Have you been asked to verify your name when creating your facebook acount?
I wasn't.
So I don't believe that all names are real.

[1eyedjack]

I expect that FG can speak for himself, but I suspect that when he expressed a preference for clamping down on abuse, I doubt that he had in mind the anonymity of players or the omission of systems information from their profiles

[hrothgar]

pirate22, on Jan 31 2010, 05:02 AM, said:

what is the reasoning behind persons arriving at the table with only the word "Private" and to boot no system stated,

...

We can all have a "NOM DE PLUME" to protect one's privacy,if necessary,

What, pray tell, is the difference between a "NOM DE PLUME" and using the word "Private"?

Have you actually given any thought to your proposal or is this just mindless venting?

[the hog]

pirate22, on Jan 31 2010, 09:02 AM, said:

As FG has stated,there may have to be a clampdown,on abuse,and other factors when playing bridge,what is the reasoning behind persons arriving at the table with only the word "Private" and to boot no system stated,
Do these persons unknown, derive some perverted sense of excitement/pleasure,perhaps they dare not contribute to the FORUM,in case they are abused:)
We can all have a "NOM DE PLUME" to protect one's privacy,if necessary,
these privates are not welcomed at my table as a partner, nor as an opponent.
any seconders???

Inclined to agree with other posters. Surely after playing a couple of hands against "Privates" you will know there standard anyway.
Is Pirate22 your real name?

[Codo]

I agree somehow.

I like real names and have the same experience as facebook: Real names make the network more polite. Yes some use non real names, but they are in a small minority.

And I like it if someone gives some basic ideas about his background. Of course anybody is free not to write anything at all. And I am free to refuse him the play at my table. And I will use this privileg without any sorrows.

[G_R__E_G]

I have my full name in my profile. Some might say that they'd be concerned about stalkers but I'm of the opinion that I could use a good stalking.

[wank]

i have my first name in my profile, but i would always refuse to play with people who say things like 'no name, no play'. i wouldn't want to play with anyone who feels the need to lecture other players

[1eyedjack]

I agree with the above. One of the reasons that I keep my profile private is just so that I don't have to bother playing against those who object to that practice.

[Codo]

wank, on Feb 2 2010, 05:42 PM, said:

i have my first name in my profile, but i would always refuse to play with people who say things like 'no name, no play'. i wouldn't want to play with anyone who feels the need to lecture other players

So I lecture someone if I refuse to play with people without a profile.

And you lecture me, because you refuse to play with me.

And you refuse to play with people who lecture other people.

Guess you never play with yourself then.

[hotShot]

I can think of many valid reasons to keep the profile "private".
Of cause there are also invalid ones.
I don't like to act upon prejudices, so I don't mind if someone has a blank profile.
I take that as "I play your system". Up to now I don't have the impression that those privates have a larger rate of <put your favorite *?!**'' here> than those with profile.
It seems intolerant to force others to follow my idea of privacy.

But it is a fact that a lot of people with little concern about privacy issues, just have no idea, what is possible with the data they supply.

[pirate22]

The reason i raised this topic is because--------previously couple of times,with my partner with no handle,verbally abused my opps,one is then stuck to make a report.---a nationality,is of interest,but not really concerned,if no Profile then they shld, "just state ill play your profile" regards

[jjbrr]

"Sticks and stones..."

[1eyedjack]

pirate22, on Feb 3 2010, 04:34 PM, said:

The reason i raised this topic is because--------previously couple of times,with my partner with no handle,verbally abused my opps,one is then stuck to make a report

Not sure I follow this. If you want to report abuse to abuse@, then you only need their login ID, and no profile setting hides that.

[pirate22]

To one eyed Jack plse explain how?--but now we have a new FACELESS person on the BLOCK--
Situation--I entered the site and elected to play main bridge with unknown partner,no problem------------- my opp,which i clicked to my surprise had a NAME,and to boot is/was the host--np a few hands passed by -nothing untoward,when my host opened 1n/t,curious i asked private to my host "Range plse?---------answer "No information" so i Private asked my other opp Range plse no answer-----------so now in chat I asked "Range plse" then i was Booted by my HOST------------------I am Happy to DECLARE The Host's NAME CLIO 888.
having observed the highest level of enquiry-------I take this as ABUSE.
am i wrong???????????????????????????
can we have a reasonavble LEVEL ply field.a very big big point--all that was on my Hosts profile was---no name no profile----BUT THE WORDS "NO Information"
interesting!!!!------------and im prepared to apologise if i have commited a "Misdeamenour" regards to clio 888. but originally the Host had no name-no info
but all they he/she had on the profile was "no information"
I rest my case--is this what bridge is all ABOUT

[1eyedjack]

I think you are confusing two issues. There is no excuse for rude behaviour and there is no excuse for concealing partnership agreements. How those agreements should be conveyed is a question that has no single solution, and it is not necessarily optimum to pursue one or more to the exclusion of others.

The "profile" area is of some albeit very limited value for this purpose, should you avail yourself of it. It is probably of greatest value in enabling a pickup partnership to agree on a basic system framework early in the game, but of less value in explaining methods to opponents except possibly if the pair is a regular partnership. Players do not tend to update their profile with system notes each time they sit down with a new partner, and the profiles of two partners will frequently be inconsistent, or even display a choice of mutually exclusive options within a single profile. As an opponent, total reliance on this disclosure is illadvised and I cannot get excited about a blank profile for this purpose.

This thread started out as a polemic against separate common practices: (1) preservation of anonymity and (2) absence of convention card. Possibly you intended to include (3) concealment of skill level. Now you have added into the mix (4) Premature booting and (5) refusing to answer questions about system.

I submit that while the personal profile area is a common factor in some of these areas the separate issues should be kept that (separate) or else the thread will degenerate into an incomprehensibe mess. In fact all of these issues are regularly debated in these forums.

In the particular example case that you cite, it is entirely possible that the opponents did not have an agreement as to their range, for example if they had just sat down as a pickup partnership. While ignoring the question is not an appropriate response, I wonder whether you would have accepted "no agreement" as an adequate response.

In any case I continue to insist that knowing or not knowing a nom-de-plume or whatever in addition to the login ID is entirely superfluous to anything in this debate.