MayBeFlaky

[Patti]

Don't assume anything from this line of questioning.  Right now I'm just trying to get a general feel for the sentiments of FIBS users... I know a lot of people don't like or play mobile users, but would you block them completely?

If you choose "it depends", please tell me what it depends on for you.

[maria]

Darn, I can only vote once.

Anyone wanna guess how I voted?

[manxcat]

    There are some long time users (and a few short time users) who are not droppers, not creating new ID's when they are blocked from inviting, playing themselves, etc, as many now do.  
   I have no problem with phone users per se, but when there are so many that they make timeouts shorter for the purpose of playing until they get a call and then dropping, i do object to them.  
   I also object to them occupying the bots and then dropping the bot, so that i cannot resume with a bot who has dropped me and I lose points because of that, which recently happened.
   Anyone can look and see if the inviter is a phone user and choose not to play them.  You don't need to go to the extreme of *villainizing* all of them.  
   There are newbies who are phone users and have not dropped, who have come into shout, complaining about the droppers.  They  learn to to use a pc to establish themselves, or talk a good enough story to get *regulars* to play them and establish themselves.
   So, it depends... perhaps limit them to playing only a certain number of matches per day/week/month, or not allowing them to play the bots more than x times a week, especially if they are a dropper, although that seems like a lot of coding.
   When someone I don't know invites me, the first thing i do is ask repbot.  Depending on # of games and the rating, i may also list repbot.  The last thing i look at is the isp, if repbot leaves me indecisive for any reason.
   I have played quite a few phone users, because i had not checked that, just the rep, and not been dropped.

I think it is up to the user to check for the variables they wish to play against.  I voted no.

[moonshadow123]

It depends.

I don't play flakeyphone users for the obvious reasons, but they don't cause me trouble and they can't make asses of themselves or others in shout, so I have no objection to letting them be.

However, if its an issue of trying to conserve server bandwidth, then blocking flakeyphone users makes a lot of sense.

[diane]

Yes for me...but only for the Odesys client [despite the fact that I use it]. The other clients are coming along, and the *idea* of being able to log into fibs from a mobile is great...but Odesys isnt great.

It was a good first step..but now there is bgonline to mention but one better alternative. Lets get rid of that first generation nightmare...and FIBS/W while we are about it  

[maria]

It was a good first step..but now there is bgonline to mention but one better alternative. Lets get rid of that first generation nightmare...and FIBS/W while we are about it  

HEY!!!  Don't get me started.

GrRrRrRrRrRrrRrRrRr

[NIHILIST]

I do control the magic button, the button that allows me to shitlist all phone users.

BTW, its not just the MAY BE FLAKYs, ISP addresses ending in .91 are phone users too, be aware.

Bob

[adrian]

Dear Patti,

I may not have been a worth to listen  contributor here ,nor a worthy contributor to fibs community. Let others judge. I feel that Odesys client is really incomplete, no shouts to shout or see, no kibitzes, just the tells and messages. That means no community awareness for the ones using it. Some of them even think that FIBS it is free! From my point of of view, I don't feel like any FIBS citizen, despite client, age or anonymity is allowed to litter, or to spit on the bus window or to poo or pee behind a tree around here. That is not freedom, or more precisely, not some behaviours to be allowed to do here for free, and who does that should pay. Dollars, euros, pounds, dinars. I hope that the ones who created Odesys do pay you a fee for FIBS expenses, really. If not, you should ask for that. I will propose to the Odesys creator to limit the usernames that the Odesys client allows to be used one one phone and I'm sure he will pay me for my idea. Just tell us how many new Odesys nicknames are created everyday..  Most of Odesys are kids or teens , look at their nicknames! Should any of you play with a fibs player who calls him/herself __D_i_r_t_Y__D_c_k_K_Sucker__ ?? Well, I feel sorry for those who do that. Look at the 70% of those Odesys knucklehead nicknames, I looked mostly at the Romanian ones and almost (I stress on almost) are either unaware kiddos or teens with their first pimples on the butt.

I voted for Odesys to go, despite of the 30% Odesys users (estimate) who are here to play the game or to be a part of FIBS.
If we all live enough, some day here will be a poll about "Should we ban javafibs users or not".
I really look up to see that happening.
Kudos to all and a Happy New Year!

[Tomawaky]

I use sometime mobile client and I don't think that anyone can complain about my playing

[diane]

I sometimes use the Odesys client...and I would complain about me...I drop matches and don't know it..[I resume them later on the computer], I cant chat and keep up with the play. If a move doesn't go through, I have to wait for hell to freeze over..I get 'are you there' tells all the time - when blatantly I am and it is them who haven't moved  [actually they have moved - and often I am two or three moves behind when suddenly things get going].

Yup - I would complain, and indeed I complain about how poor the experience is, whilst also enjoying that I can play on the beach while I watch the waves roll in and out....or while I am waiting for a train or bus etc

[dorbel]

Phone players don't impact on my use of fibs in any great way. I don't accept their invites, barring one or two that I have got to know. I expect that they do take up bandwidth and that this sometimes leads to increased time outs, but I don't find that to be much of a problem. You get timed out, you log back in, not so terrible.
What are the benefits of having phone players use fibs? Every bg club that I have belonged to IRL has suffered the same problem. It starts with a wave of enthusiasm, quickly builds to a peak membership as it draws in all the players in its catchment area, then slowly tails off and eventually dies. The reason for this isn't hard to find. There is no effort made to draw new players into the game and some clubs,in various ways, actively discourage newbies!
Fibs and in a wider sense backgammon as an organised game needs a constant supply of new players to avoid atrophy. The phone players are our new blood. Some, probably most, are a waste of space but a significant proportion are people who want to play and will go on to have an account on a computer and take up the game.
There isn't anything to be gained from shoving them out, apart from lowering the blood pressure of one or two of our older residents, who have had the same chair in the tv lounge for 20 years and hate newcomers on principle. I vote for continuing the experiment.
Speaking of oldsters in the tv lounge, has anybody heard from Joe Tamargo recently? Any news welcomed, even bad.

[NIHILIST]

He was evicted from the nursing home. He's on his way to Spain to room with you.

Bob

[diane]

Speaking of oldsters in the tv lounge, has anybody heard from Joe Tamargo recently? Any news welcomed, even bad.

I scammed him for a five point match yesterday..he was well enough to remark that my rolling skills were exceptional...in  kind hearted way 

[dorbel]

That's good news, thank you.

[spielberg]

I've voted "No". Some phone users are annoying, but there are good ones who do their best on what are poor front ends (they're even worse than Fibs/w ariam!) and I dislike a blanket veto as I think it unfair.

[socksey]

I voted "yes" because the phone users have been nothing but a problem since they first hit Fibs community.     I love newbies, but this phone thing has too many problems.     I am totally annoyed at the timeouts the load has caused, not to mention the lag that seems to be ever a problem.      This has caused MUCH interference with tourney play which everyone knows is on the top of my list of activity on Fibs.     So, yes, I have voted "yes".   

socksey



I don't let my mouth say nothin' my head can't stand. - Louis Armstrong

[dorbel]

Timeouts and lag caused by high user numbers are exactly that. Whether the players log in from a phone or a pc isn't relevant.
Socksey says that she welcomes newbies, but her other words carry a different message.

[pck]

I've voted "No". Some phone users are annoying, but there are good ones who do their best on what are poor front ends (they're even worse than Fibs/w ariam!) and I dislike a blanket veto as I think it unfair.

I've voted "no" for the same reasons.

I consider the construction of a causal relationship between phone users and the shortening of the timeout limit to be unfair and unwarranted. One might equally accuse any other sufficiently large group of fibsters (for example all Midwesterners). The shorter timeout was not introduced as a means to justify the punishing of any special group of users.

(Now waiting for the "phone lover" messages to come in ...)

[socksey]

Timeouts and lag caused by high user numbers are exactly that. Whether the players log in from a phone or a pc isn't relevant.
Socksey says that she welcomes newbies, but her other words carry a different message.

Maybe I should have qualified that to 'newbies on desktops'.  Yes, desktop users may some day cause the same lag problems as the numbers build, but maybe Patti will figure out a better system for Fibs by that time.   

I'm still voting 'yes'!     I got caught by another one of those little buggers yesterday!     Accepted an invite and made my first play only to wait until 'it' dropped the game.  My bad!     Kick them out!

socksey



If we do not change our direction, we are likely to end up where we are headed. - Ancient Chinese proverb

[pck]

[...] Yes, desktop users may some day cause the same lag problems as the numbers build [...]

AFAIK it is not at all clear that lag and # of users on fibs are in any way correlated. Let's suppose it were true though. Then it would still be entirely unjustified to attribute the cause of the lag only to a select group of people you happen to dislike.