View previous topic :: View next topic |
Do you want admin to spend their time on new games (vote no if you want them developing new ways to control who joins you in playing current games)? |
Yes |
|
90% |
[ 45 ] |
No |
|
10% |
[ 5 ] |
|
Total Votes : 50 |
|
Author |
Message |
Rebelslayer
Joined: 17 Jan 06 Posts: 298
Location: Adelaide, Australia
|
Posted: Thu Nov 29, 2007 4:47 pm Post subject: Are you happy with the current setup of player choice in SBW |
|
|
This poll aims (with very little chance of success in stopping the interminable discussion I know) to put to bed the idea that there is a LARGE subset of players who won't use the currently available process of passwording games but want a series of other options like certian number of games completed, certain turn time etc etc ... ad nauseum |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
craniac
Joined: 27 Jan 06 Posts: 31
|
Posted: Thu Nov 29, 2007 5:50 pm Post subject: |
|
|
The phrasing of the survey is totally biased, rendering the results worthless. |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
t_o_m9

Joined: 14 Apr 06 Posts: 318
Location: Lakeville, MN
|
Posted: Thu Nov 29, 2007 6:07 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I think it would be neat to be able to create a game and chose if it is a "ranked game" or "fun game", meaning will it count towards your win % or not. I've played 4-5 "learner" games of Santiago that would have been nice if they didn't count against the win percent. Maybe games that are "ranked" would play faster. |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
lefty

Joined: 03 Sep 07 Posts: 54
Location: South Central PA
|
Posted: Thu Nov 29, 2007 6:52 pm Post subject: |
|
|
A fun game option would be a good idea in my opinion |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
mdfreeman7
Joined: 09 Jan 07 Posts: 45
Location: Fallbrook, California, USA
|
Posted: Thu Nov 29, 2007 7:09 pm Post subject: |
|
|
In the Poll, where are the "Neither" or "Both" or "No Opinion" options? The way it's phrased, It really can't be close to accurate w/o more choices.
I'd like to vote, but my choice is not listed. |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
Rebelslayer
Joined: 17 Jan 06 Posts: 298
Location: Adelaide, Australia
|
Posted: Thu Nov 29, 2007 7:32 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Hmm ... seemed to have just succeded in moving the discussion to another forum on which it will continue to run.
I purposely set up the poll with ONLY 2 options as I don't want fence sitter options available. I myself would probably use a series of other options when setting up games if they were available. HOWEVER ... I would love to play La Citta online too ... and the coders only have a limited amount of time for doing these sort of things, so unless someone wants to take on a coder job to do all of these cosmetic changes (always supposing the admin are happy to lett someone else mess with their code, which I wouldn't be) ... then the aim of this poll as stated is ...
STATE YOUR POSITION
(we aren't in the ideal world where everything can be done).  |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
hagin
Joined: 12 Aug 07 Posts: 121
Location: Perth, WA
|
Posted: Fri Nov 30, 2007 3:22 am Post subject: |
|
|
This poll is ridiculous and obviously slanted to achieving a particular outcome by phrasing the question in terms of being a choice between new games and player filtering.
Let's move on. |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
freduk

Joined: 18 Jan 06 Posts: 433
Location: Bristol, UK
|
Posted: Fri Nov 30, 2007 8:27 am Post subject: |
|
|
hagin wrote: | This poll is ridiculous and obviously slanted to achieving a particular outcome by phrasing the question in terms of being a choice between new games and player filtering.
Let's move on. |
You really don't get it, do you?
The choice really is about new games or player filtering. This is not a BigCorp site with unlimited resources to develop anything that is wanted. It's a hobby site run by enthusiasts with very limited time to develop anything at all. Player filtering (regardless of whether it's a good or bad thing - see other thread) will only come at the expense of developing new games. |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
Rebelslayer
Joined: 17 Jan 06 Posts: 298
Location: Adelaide, Australia
|
Posted: Fri Nov 30, 2007 8:57 am Post subject: |
|
|
Thanks Fred ... glad someone else understands ... in fact, it looks like 90% of people understand! |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
craniac
Joined: 27 Jan 06 Posts: 31
|
Posted: Fri Nov 30, 2007 9:04 am Post subject: |
|
|
In the other survey it's a bit more even. |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
ahauwi1
Joined: 22 Dec 06 Posts: 112
Location: Minneapolis, MN
|
Posted: Fri Nov 30, 2007 9:16 am Post subject: |
|
|
Perhaps if a tip jar could be tied to each proposed feature, rather than a poll? It may serve both to remove any bias inherent in the polling and to help fund the changes... |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
spearjr

Joined: 11 Nov 05 Posts: 206
Location: Southwestern Michigan
|
Posted: Fri Nov 30, 2007 9:48 am Post subject: |
|
|
freduk wrote: | The choice really is about new games or player filtering. This is not a BigCorp site with unlimited resources to develop anything that is wanted. It's a hobby site run by enthusiasts with very limited time to develop anything at all. Player filtering (regardless of whether it's a good or bad thing - see other thread) will only come at the expense of developing new games. | Seems to me that the issue is this black and white. Well put. |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
Rebelslayer
Joined: 17 Jan 06 Posts: 298
Location: Adelaide, Australia
|
Posted: Fri Nov 30, 2007 11:06 am Post subject: |
|
|
crainiac ... one survey includes the issue of reality ... that every change take time to code and test ... the other survey looks at the idealic situation where there are no restrictions on time for coders or even ability to code what is being discussed, or the availability of a player willing to join a game where their position will often not be great.
I'm not against pie in the sky ... just want to see more games as the current ones are getting a bit dry for me!
One piece of pie in the sky: code as you are suggesting for booting players, and anyone who joins to replace doesnt get a loss recorded against them if they lose in the stats, but does get a win if they pull off a win (note I would only want to see this if we had 100 different games to play etc etc).
 |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
milksheikh Site Admin

Joined: 24 Sep 03 Posts: 399
Location: Brooklyn, New York, USA
|
Posted: Sun Dec 02, 2007 8:38 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I honestly believe there is a lot of merit to both sides of this argument. Which makes developing a good solution that much more difficult -- doing it in a way that will please everyone involved.
I do also want to improve this site. It is my child, and I do want to see it improve and develop. There are dozens, possibly hundreds of good suggestions that have been made and I would like to implement all of them. And yes, taking on additional volunteer developers would help address that, but doing even that will take a significant amount of effort to manage. I know this from experience -- bringing Ryan and Myke onboard has resulted in the addition of two excellent games, and they really saved me in terms of stepping up and taking over much of the daily administration and bug fixing over the past year, but it did take a lot of time supporting them in getting acquainted with how everything works, and was also a big risk (fortunately neither of them have wiped out the database, at least not yet).
I'm closing this and a few other threads that have passed the point of meaningful discussion for the time being, so that (a) I can catch up and (b) folks can calm down a little bit. I do ask that you all keep civil and respectful in your posts, and please try to remember that you aren't always going to be able to convince those with opposing views that you are right. |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
|