pgt: Everybody knows what bottons are. We used to have buttons, but those have become obsolete, so now we have bottons.

nightmagic:
Nightmagic, here is a screenshot of my FireFox, I am one click away to BrainKing... Why cant U have one?  

My Browser


Dont give up so fast on a good thing, learn how to use it and it will be your friend..  U really can do more with FireFox than IE... 

ßăķëď Äłáşķǻñ: About the only conclusion one can draw from this thread is that the "PC" stand for "PERSONAL computer", and that everybody seems to have their own pet way of doing things, which works for them. I'm happy, and hope everybody else is too. Sorry for stirring up a hornet's nest.

mctrivia: If loading partially finished pages is the issue, people can try to change some options in Settings that reduce the page size. Like changing the number of games that can be displayed in the main page, or changing the number of posts per page in discussion boards to five. Smiles popup also comes to mind, although I'm not sure if IE preloads this one as well or not. Adds may also have something to do with it, not sure.

I have many of those things disabled / reduced and the site works blazing fast for me on IE too, just tryed to play a few games and each page took less than a couple of seconds to load. The fact that the pages display instantly even makes the illusion that the pages load faster than in Opera (it's just an illusion, the timing is the same and I still prefer Opera, anyways, since I have much more control on how the page shows up than in IE).

pgt: That's the spirit - I'm happy using Opera, you're happy with Firefox and somebody else is happy with IE. And it's nobody else's business!
So let's play

Fencer, can you also remove inactive users from the statistics like herre? http://brainking.com/nl/Statistics?p=3

Fencer I just read your autopasspost in your blog. Did i understand correct:
If one player offers autopass and the other doesnt accept = no autopass for any of the players?

Andersp: Of course. Both players must agree with the autopass, otherwise it's not used in the particular game.

Fencer: just challenged a person in Stairs, was no autopass option there?...was this our deal?

Andersp: Why are you so picky? This is a test period. It works only for normal games at the moment. Be patient. I don't want why people always expect to have everything at once.

Fencer: Would be nice if autopass could be set to play all games by default and would play already running games

mctrivia: I am afraid I don't understand.

Fencer: For example anyone using autoplayer on my server just choses what game types they want played. They can turn individual games off if they like but by default it will play any auto pass or auto move games they have.

It would be nice if there were in the settings page a tab for what game types you want autoplayer to play.

On the Fellowships list, I request that the column on the right, "Games We Play", either consist of:

1. A limited list of five or less games. If the list is longer than five games, then the number of games as a link to a complete list... or,

2. A list of the types of games they play, i.e. chess variants, line games, etc.

This would result in being able to see a lot more fellowships on one page, and therefore easier to browse through.

I would like to see some kind of formal feature request. Something were we can have chats under each request and vote on how important it is to us. Something like this:

http://mctrivia.com/BK/feature.php

P.S. The page is completely functional for all registered BK users. Though I did not spend much time to write it.

I'm not saying mctrivia is trying to get everyones password or anything, but a general warning - BE CAREFULL when you enter things like your username & password on other sites.

Even though it can look 100% legit, and such - there are hundreds of sites across the internet that do the same thing for things like PayPal - just to get important information from you.

I know mctrivia's does a lot of different scripting and such for players on this site, and I'm sure is an honest person and does keep passwords hidden even from himself - but remember it is "user beware / Use are your own risk" - it is not BK's responisblity to keep your password & information safe on sites outside of the BK world.

Again, just so I'm clear - I'm not tring to say anything bad about what mctrivia is doing or make it seem like you can't trust him - just want to make sure users know it can be a risk to use scripts outside of the BK site which require personal information like passwords and such.

mctrivia: Is priority 0 the highest, or the lowest priority?

mctrivia: If I understand the concept correctly, it's like the bug tracker but with the ability for severall people to contribute to each feature's priority (instead of simply replacing it, like in the bug tracker) and for Fencer to provide some feedback on it's status of completion.
Is that it?

I like the concept in general. But I fear it would soon turn into another bug tracker where it's near to impossible to find anything older than a week, and people would just start posting duplicate requests...

But I'd like to have some feedback about Fencer's TODO list, eyc

I think Cheversi is a great game. Its quick and the rules are simple, but the advantage is still with black, though not as much as it was.
Could we have a dice version, where the dice would denote what piece a player would have to place on the board.
It would open it up a bit to both players

MadMonkey: Or, maybe another forced move for Black. (Say, play a Rook at turn 2)

joshi tm: I think it would be much more fun and a better game with a dice, just like Dice Chess, there would be no advantage as such.
Black could be left with Queen, King or knight etc as a last move, not really giving them an advantage. At least it should create closer games.

MadMonkey: No, only Dice Chess should have a luck factor.

BIG BAD WOLF: Yes that is a good warning I should have writen myself( The only thing the password is used for is it attempts to log on to BK once if it works it writes your name into the session info and gives full access to the site. You could change your password at any time before and after and it would not care.). I will give full source codes to any that want. I was just board and decided to try and make the idea functional instead of just requesting something. THe idea is kind of like the bug tracker with a couple big diferences.

1) Every user can make posts on every entry.
2) Every user can set there own priority for a request.
3) Fencer can report the status of any request(though I never bothered to code that ability in since I highly doubted he would log on to the site as himself).

Basically a fellowship with each request being its own board.

AbigailII: As it was ment as an example it really does not mater what is high or low but I prefer 5 as high myself.

joshi tm: I think that any game using a dice has that element of luck to it.
I just think it would make Cheversi a better/fairer game.

Backgammon (gogul vs. pgt)

This game uses autopass, but I still get "since youcannot move, press submit" message. Autopass does not appear to be working. Any suggsetions?

pgt: Autopass cannot be used since you still have an option to offer a double.

Fencer: So autopass is never an option in a cube match when you "own" the cube?

pgt: Right. Or do you have a better solution? Like an option "click here if you never want to offer a double in this game"?

Fencer: Perhaps "never in this game" is a bit harsh, but maybe a "activate autopass until there is a possible move" would be a good idea.
In fact, that would solve ALL the problems, without having to agree on autopass when setting up the game: the player who cannot move could just click "do the autopass on my behalf until I can move again" if that's his wish. His opponent could not possibly object (could he?).

pgt: The opponent could object if he doesn't want to play with autopass at all.

Fencer: Take a poll!! I bet you a year's membership that 99% of BG players would not object!

Gee Fencer, you could have a year's membership!

emmett: But not likely!

Fencer: The opponent could object if he doesn't want to play with autopass at all.

Yes...., but is that a reasonable objection? Say I would use an automatic system to pass for me (be it autopass or a script that I've running on my computer) would the playing experience for my opponent be any different as from me just moving quickly? If the objection is that "but with autopass, the games come right back at me", I'm happy with autopass giving my opponent to option of having a delay. (That is, players can choose that if their opponent uses autopass, the automove happens after 5 minutes).

AbigailII: I cant understand why both players must agree to autopass. I dont care if my opponent is a "clicklover" so why should he/she have any objections if im using autopass alone?

Andersp: I don't understand that either. In my humble opinion, a red message "Your opponent is using Autopass", just as the auto vacation message would perfectly do the job. You wouldn't be surprised by an offline opponent passing back every game to you in an instance, and everybody who wants to take advantage of it could do so.

And I really like pgt's suggestion of a "use autopass as long as I can't move" option when you own the cube - the chances that I want to offer a double get smaller not bigger when I can't move several times in a row, I guess

Gordon Shumway: Maybe it requires both players approval because it's still in an experimental phase and Fencer is being cautious.
I aggree when you compare it to AutoVacation. I find AutoVac much more intrusive in a game (since my opponent won't timeout when expected and a game may go well beyond the time I intended it to in the begining) and I'm not asked if I allow my opponent can use AutoVacation or not.
I hope AutoPass will be like this sooner or later, let's just wait a while...

I can't believe anyone could reasonably object to an opponent using autopass any more than they could object to their opponent moving quickly.

If doubling is an option, at least the options should be "double" and "pass" which would at least skip the step of rolling.

pauloaguia: Good point(s), that sounds reasonable :)

pauloaguia: I find AutoVac much more intrusive in a game (since my opponent won't timeout when expected and a game may go well beyond the time I intended it to in the begining)

While I agree with the points being made regarding autopass, I don't quite agree with the point quoted. Even if your opponent doesn't use auto-vacation, he can still set vacation days after the game starts (and if he doesn't use auto-vacation, and will be on vacation, he's likely to do so).

IMO, vacation plays a role in how long a game lasts, but much less so as the average amount of moves we manage to make in a day - and the latter is depending on many factors, one of which is the timezones the players are in.

AbigailII: Problem is AutoVac kicks in even if the player is NOT on vacation. Meaning that they can still log in and make moves, chat etc... yet the games they don't move in still don't time out.

grenv: I can't believe anyone could reasonably object to an opponent using autopass any more than they could object to their opponent moving quickly.

If doubling is an option, at least the options should be "double" and "pass" which would at least skip the step of rolling.

I agree 100% on both issues. But pauloaguia is probably right that the rule that both players must agree is only intended for the test phase, which sounds reasonable.

AbigailII: Point taken. You are right, of course.
But I still don't see much of a difference between having to accept AutoPass or having to Accept AutoVacation.
(except, maybe, on Fischer clock games - there AutoPass gives you an advantge, because the clock is less time on your side).

Fencer: I dont think you shall waste more time on autopass, its better to have no autopass at all than this "agreement mix"

Andersp: Is it an autopass or not?

Fencer: I rather have no autopass at all than have to "ask for my opponents permission" to use it ..understand? :)

Andersp: There is no pleasing some people. Then play only with opponents who won't decline the autopass request.

Fencer: Well...as you can see im not the only one you "cant please"..but ok..ill do as you say...at least you are pleased then.

Fencer: It would be helpful for those that desperatly need autopass to have the option to make the invitation invalid if the opponent doesn't accept it. A "only invite if autopass is accepted" - checkbox. So autopass-wannahaves can play each other, autopass-ohnos can play each other and everybody can play against autopass-idontcares like me and be safe before sending the invitation :)