I don't care if there's a public Politics board or not. General Chat is general chat and it should be open for any kind of discussion.

NOT a floosie: Slight problem for Pawns with the fellowship idea.

Pedro: I agree, If this Features board can have English language debates(!) then General will get any and all topics.

Summertop: Yet I see the value in a Politics board for those that want it.

playBunny: Membership does have its advantages.

Ah, but General Chat does NOT allow any and all discussions. I have seen many times where a moderator has asked for a topic to be discussed elsewhere. For example, I have seen where a topic has evolved to discussing a proposed feature when a mod came in and asked it to be continued on the feature board. So, the same would hold true for politics.

I just think that with how often (and how negative) political discussion come up, it would be nice to put it somewhere else. I also feel it should be a general board (not a fellowship).

ScarletRose: I totally disagree! Its working fine on the General Chat Board without Moderators having to do anything! The conversation about politics hasn't involved any swearing or inappropriate language, apart from yourself who got the closest to it by saying 'freaking this & freaking that'
General Chat, is GENERAL CHAT & we should be able to discuss anything of general interest! Besides the current politcs conversation on there is far better than the useless drivvle that is usually on there! Its refreshing to actually read a proper topic of conversation. For those who don't like it its simple....dont read it!
However, I would not be opposed to a General Polics Board aswell

Lamby: I have to skip all the Politics and like so its not worth reading anymore for me .

Jason: No offense, but you are a member of 34 fellowships, including having your own, so surely there must be plenty of reading for you here on BK?
Besides with General Chat being a General Chat board I doubt that political converstion will carry on there indefinately, thats the great thing, its open to any & every topic :o)

Please stop this argument. The request was placed and acknowledged, no further discussion can make the process faster.

Fencer, thanks Fencer...Just out of curiosity, where are feature requests acknowledged?

I apoligize for allowing it to go this long. Next time something like this starts, it will be hushed sooner if I possibly can.

Czuch Chuckers just noticed that there is a tournament created for October 2006. He saw it on the link on the main page and went for it but realised in time that it's pointless joining it now.

There are two people who have created a year's worth of tournaments in one go. It makes it easy for them but it creates problems for everybody else.

Firstly, as Czuch found, the distant tournaments, though practically irrelevant, get displayed on the main board. Presumably these tournaments are chosen at random from the entire list. As there is a high percentage of these far-futures's, that's going to have a potentially large number of people going to the tournament and backing out when they've realised that they've wasted their time. Or perhaps they don't realise, join up and a year hence find themselves in a tourney that they'd forgotten about.

The other problem is, I would guess, more serious. The entire tournament list gets downloaded every time that anyone visits that page. With so many pointless tournaments that's a huge waste of bandwidth for the server and a pain in the bum for anyone on a slow dialup, not to mention a leak in their purse if they are paying by the minute.

The feature request is thus to allow people to create tournaments in advance, decades if they so desire, but don't have them appear in the system until they are within a more reasonable period. I would be quite happy only knowing what's happening in the next week or so and I'm sure some would want longer, but who needs to plan their tournaments months ahead?

Following on from the previous request.

It would be nice to ease the load on the server and making allowances for people on dialup, or those who simply don't appreciate having to download huge lists.

One example is the tournament list mentioned blow. Another is when looking at someone's Started Games. I do this to see how busy potential opponents are or, having moved, to see where in their list my games are. As a broadband user that's not too bad except for the people with hundreds of games - then it can be seconds to download. But for a dialup user those sorts of lists are painful and expensive.

A simple solution would be to have a User Setting which limits the length of these lists to a given number of entries. More complex would be allowing a date horizon to be specified. taking it further there could be different values for different lists.

It really doesn't surprise me that those two are Kata Liana and AbigailII.

The top files from my internet cache:

686KB .... "Vvvvv" Started Games (one of my current opponents - 1800 games!!)
312KB .... "Wwwww" Started Games (another opponent - 900 games!!)
251KB .... Finished Ponds
245KB .... "Xxxxx" Started Games
244KB .... "Yyyyy" Finished Games
167KB .... Tournaments list
129KB .... "Zzzzz" Started Games
108KB .... Fellowships list (I'd rather see the description than the lists of games)
107KB .... Backgammon discussion (but that's my choice of how many messages I want to see)

While it was interesting to go to these pages, there's no way that I've made use of even 1% of the information (except on a discussion board that's been busy).

On the main page there is a line saying something like "Total number of started games: 22 (you have 28 free slots)".
The number 22 here equals the number of ongoing games plus the number of ongoing ponds.

Id like to request that this number also includes the number of pending invitations (from me to someone else) since these games actually influence my hability to start new games.

Lamby: Yeh, we should get a politics board up! Hiya Lamby ;)

Just an idea ...

If the timing of the Fischer clock were done using client-side javascript then it might be possible to work out a decent way to have sub-hour times and bonuses. It may even be possible to create clock control suitable for real-time games, such as (in backgammon) 2 minutes for the game plus 10 seconds bonus per move (though that's not taking postback and reload into account).

LuckyCat9: No more bringing up old requests please

playBunny: thank you for your information but please anymore on this Fischer clock thing should be taken to the chess boards. thank you

MidnightMcMedic: Take the idea to the Chess discussion board? I think not, lol - I don't care two hoots about chess.

The clock may be named after a chess player but timed games are very much a feature of backgammon. i only use the name because that's what it's labelled here. I could have given it the title Timed Games in Backgammon with Minutes and Seconds - oh, I just did. ;-)

And besides, this feature suggestion is a totally new idea, incorporating client-side javascript as it does.

Sorry, I thought it was back to something else. Thanks for explaining. I just play the game, not into that side of the competitive stuffs.

playBunny: There was a discussion on javascript on the Czech version of this board and Fencer referred to it as an "enormousness"...:)

Pedro Martínez: Lolol. It can get very mindboggling, especially if you have server-side generation of content plus client-side generation of content plus javascript bells and whistles. Testing of the pages has completely different challenges to plain old html, too.

I wish I had taken part in that discussion. Can we have it all over again in English? ;-)

to make it to where when you put someone on hide on one board.. it automatically puts them on hide throughtout the rest of the site?? It is really annoying to have someone hidden for days then stumble onto a board where you have participated.. only to see that user post negative towards you when they usually don't post there to begin with..

Please.. could you consider putting this code in..

Thanks

playBunny: Anything you do on the client side cannot be trusted. I could simply modify the incoming Javascript to not send a time out to the server. Of course, you could be checking at the server as well, but if you're going to do the checking for time-out on the server, there's no need to do it in Javascript on the client side.

On the Message Box page there's a two-value dropdown and a [Show] button for changing between the Inbox and the Outbox. It would be simper if there were two separate buttons.

playBunny: I suspsect that Fencer's approach with options like this is "one-click", so selecting from 2 options and clicking "OK" or something would be non-optimal :)

WhiteTower: Eh? The dropdown + button requires click-search-click-click - hence the request for a pair of buttons, which is a one-click solution.

playBunny: Sorry, I meant that the other way around - meaning that Fencer's NORMAL behaviour is "one-click" :)

Could lists of players have a link for sorting by country? Secondary sort key could be rating (for a ratings list) and name (for the Players List).

Playbunny - sorting by country is already here , go with your mouse on a flag :]

playBunny: ~If you want to see the players from a specific country in the Player List just select that country's name in the combobox at the top and click the search button.

Could it be modified so that EVERY list is sorted. If there are multiple columns, allow each column to be sorted. Otherwise just sort by the Displayed text.

Example 1: When you go to a friend's profile to challenge them to a game, the dropdown list of games is sorted by a value (Game ID?) that is not seen. It would be VERY nice if it was sorted by the Games' Name.

Example 2: When you are creating a tournament, all of the game types are listed. Again, it appears that they are sorted by the Game Type's ID not the Name. Since only the Name is displayed, it gets cumbersome to select only the games you want.

As the number of games increases, this problem will only get worse.

Also, there are other lists that need sorting capabilites such "Friends Online" and "Fellowships", both on the main page. Curiously, "Favourite boards" appears to already be sorted.

I have the page layout to be columnar. On the left side, the links are broken out into four groups.
Group 1: seems to be mostly for games
Group 2: seems to be mostly User's info
Group 3: seems to be mostly Brainking info
Group 4: is just Logout

However, some links are out of place. This is more of a suggestion than a feature request, but could these groups of links be more strict as to what is there. For example, The user's "Settings" option makes more sense to be with all the other "User" links, while the "What's New" and "Discussion baords" links would be logically with all the other Barinking specific links.

Maxxina, Paulo: Thanks for that flag tip - I never knew about that; it's a handy shortcut to what Paulo suggested. :-)

The request arose when looking at the Backgammon Ratings list. What I wanted was to see all the UK players and also to browse through and see how big a block each country had, and whatever else occurred to me.

Unfortunately, although the click-a-flag-to-sort works in the Players List, if done in the Backgammon Ratings list it doesn't sort that table but jumps to the Players List.

Summertop: I'll second all of your proposals.
1) I don't want to have to know the order of the game types when I'm looking for a game, I want to go to it alphabetically (especially as it's most often backgammon and will be at the top, lol).
2) Sorting tables by any column (especially with careful choices of secondary and tertiary sort keys) could be very handy/interesting.
3) Sort everything in site. To misuse that old military phrase: "If it moves, send it a message; it it doesn't, sort it!" ;-))

has it ever been discussed about having the ability to delete a game after you accept it or whatever within the first few moves?

ArtfulDodger: It's available for paying members only.

Fencer: Let's also mention it used to be available to all members before. Probably too much for the server then.

WhiteTower: Let's also mention it was available to everyone until several idiots started to accept public invitations and delete them right after it, probably as a great fun. That's why this restriction was applied. Who doesn't like it, can spend several Euros for a higher level.

Fencer: Um, that makes them paying idiots, right? :)

WhiteTower: hehe :)

WhiteTower: Even paying idiots can support our site :-D

Fencer: Whatever tickles their fancy - if they want to pay and be idiots, no problem :) Have you been able to see the reduction in this practice ever since the introduction of this measure?

And BTW, what if a deletion had to work from both sides in order to be valid? Then, everyone could have it and no idiots would force one-sided deletions. Unless there's some inherent necessity to have one-sided deletions...

Fencer: Two feature questions for you, Filip:

- Is it possible to have some kind of update on the progress of the features in development as shown above?

- Is it possible to search for posts by sender as well as content?

Fencer: ahhhh....membership has its privileges ;)

WhiteTower: Then you'd get the idiots (admittedly not as many) who refuse to let someone delete the game. :-( The best solution would be an override which the first person could use to force the deletion. Lolol. ;-)

Fencer: I'll second that search by poster's name.

Fencer II: Yeah, yeah, yeah!! I'm also much with the curiousimus about Pro Bg. Oh, tell us, do. It's my birthday today sooo you could ....... Make my day!

for Pawns, 26 is a smiley with hat ;-)

A question: Is the absolutely privacy of fellowships guaranteed? is it guaranteed that not anybody, who is not member of the fellowship, can look in it?
Can it be guaranteed that this was not done and will not be done?

chessmec: No fellowship can be guaranteed to be private. Copying and pasting by one or more of its members sees to that.
Otherwise, I believe fellowships are secure. I think there was a bug that allowed non-members to view but that has been sorted out. Don't quote me on that though.

myfanwy: No fellowship can be guaranteed to be private. Copying and pasting by one or more of its members sees to that.
This is not that what i mean.

Otherwise, I believe fellowships are secure. I think there was a bug that allowed non-members to view but that has been sorted out. Don't quote me on that though.
And if a non-member is an admin here? This is it what i mean.

In my opinion an admin here has to handle fellowships in the same way as a sysadmin the mails of his administrated server. I am a sysadmin and i think and do so.

chessmec: A non-member has no access to the fellowship boards at all, regardless whether he was a moderator before or not. It applies to the global moderators as well.
On the other hand, the real admins - Liquid and me - have a full access everywhere. But that's what everyone must accept.