Quote

Originally posted by number 279:
**The input of all our members is greatly appreciated on these boards. That's what they exist for. This thread however, is just here to post tournament results. If you guys want to make a new thread weighing the pro's and con's of the different tournament styles, feel free.
**

i´ld like to do so, because i´m a bit worried that the "pop-pop-community" is starting to fall apart over this subject, and that would of course also be the end of tournaments. So i think it would be quite important to try and make the "tournament style" suitable for everyone - or at least almost everyone.
i think the rules should be clear before the tournament, and they shouldn´t be changed during one (otherwise there will always be discussions and moaning afterwards). if you want a rule that says that there is no second round if it´s less than 10 players, we should agree on that rule BEFORE the next tournament (although i think that would be the end of the second round...and in the long term the end of interest in tournaments).
i am definately against a rule that says that rules can always be changed...

Quote

Originally posted by Lumisa:
**in my oppinion there should always be a second round as long as there are more than 4 players. it´s about chances for the others to catch up. (just a thought)

**

still my oppinion, most of all because it´s supposed to be fun, and exiting, and a second round will always make it more exiting for everyone.
furthermore i think, that there shouldn´t be tournaments every week. a bit less often would make them a bit more desirable.
if there are only few players, at least (!) the two best of those should play a final.

Quote

Originally posted by number 279:
**So, I'm ending this thread with a hearty congratulations to Lumisa, and thanks to all of our tournament and forum participants. Keep the input coming so we can make the tournament as streamlined and fun as possible.

**

thanks, number 278.
i hope that this is what you call input, and i hope that everything is fine for you and nothing awful happend that day you didn´t manage to cancel the tournament.
see you
lumisa
ps. even though i see the mistakes that happend in the last tournament, i highly appreciate that anklebiter made them happen - before that nothing much happend, and nobody really wanted to host a tournament at all.

------------------

(This message has been edited by lumisa (edited 03-21-2003).)

The pop-pop community doesn't have to be split. They just need to realize that I am not perfect, and they need to give me my space, especially during tournaments.

I have seen several times where players didn't want to follow the rules. In the old rules it said the referee would tell who would play who. That never happened. I have tried at least once to have a 3rd round and that never happened even though I wanted it too.

I didn't call anyone up on this, mostly because I really feel it doesn't matter. Everyone has having fun. Then things took a turn.

The new rules were designed to fix all of the loop holes, because honestly, I don't like being shot at. Honestly, not too much has changed, just I put in some provisions to protect myself.

It is always easier to destroy something then to build it up. And that is where we are at. I am just like an animal, I am pretty peaceful until I am backed into a corner. When you corner me, I have no where to go but past the person blocking my way. All I am doing is providing a time and place, its up too the community if they want to build the tournaments up, or destroy them.

Its your choice, not mine.

------------------
I am the fox, let my talk will thrill you, when you get to know me, my smile will chill you. With a name like anklebiter, just what did you expect? (url="http://"http://www.foxchange.com/~matt/anklecam/")web cam(/url)

Quote

Originally posted by anklebiter:
**The pop-pop community doesn't have to be split. They just need to realize that I am not perfect, and they need to give me my space, especially during tournaments.

I have seen several times where players didn't want to follow the rules. In the old rules it said the referee would tell who would play who. That never happened. I have tried at least once to have a 3rd round and that never happened even though I wanted it too.

I didn't call anyone up on this, mostly because I really feel it doesn't matter. Everyone has having fun. Then things took a turn.
**

I think it's just a case of being clearer - i.e. did the 'win every round win's tournament' rule override the 'play three rounds' rule.

I think that some of the rules were just silly - e.g. the 'ref telling everyone who to play' type thing - let everyone sort themselves out if it is an 'everyone plays everyone once' round. If you are doing a knock-out tree then sure - it makes sense for someone to direct. Problem with pop-pop is (again) no chat - so it is very difficult to actually direct anything. Best bet is to just let the players know what is going on, and let them sort it out. 'Flat hierarchy' management is much better than 'pyramid' here, and more fun.

Quote

Originally posted by anklebiter:
**The new rules were designed to fix all of the loop holes, because honestly, I don't like being shot at. Honestly, not too much has changed, just I put in some provisions to protect myself.
**

I can see where your coming from - but the 'management reserves right to change...' stuff is making the whole thing overly pyramidal 'you will do it this way' type of thing. Totally unnecessary if you do just say what is going to happen before. That's much better, and then everyone realises. I know as a programmer just how difficult it is to lay things down explicitly such that they cannot be misinterpreted in English. That's why we don't program computers in it, and why lawyers have to invent their own (basically programming) language to deal with it for them. Funny thing is that they fail - it would probably have been much better if law was written in C That is, until we court seg-faults.

In other words, just say what which rules take priority - and if one set of rules is to apply for a given number of players and a different one for a different number, say that too, before everyone starts. Language barrier and people's different personalities (along with the impossibility of getting anything across in the lounge) just makes it next to impossible not to cause offense (or resolve it if you do) otherwise. Okay, that was quite a long sentence!

Quote

Originally posted by anklebiter:
**It is always easier to destroy something then to build it up. And that is where we are at. I am just like an animal, I am pretty peaceful until I am backed into a corner. When you corner me, I have no where to go but past the person blocking my way. All I am doing is providing a time and place, its up too the community if they want to build the tournaments up, or destroy them.

Its your choice, not mine.
**

Okay, you don't need to be overly dramatic - I'm sure everyone who has taken part in these has enjoyed them, and respects you (and 279) for putting yourself (or yourselves) out to host them. Certainly nobody is trying to stab you in the back or anything. I still hold that it would be better to have fewer tournaments if that made them slightly bigger. (Or maybe even regardless) once a fortnight is about as often as I would consider necessary - but that's just my opinion. Mainly because if they are less frequent, you can give more notice, and then people will have time to mark it in their diaries. My 2p FWIW.

Anyway, that's what this topic is for, so lets hear some sensible input from other people as to any changes they might like, or whether they are happy with things as they are? More so, anybody out there who doesn't play in them: perhaps you can say why you haven't. Is it that they are at bad times? Do they give the impression of being too competitive? Are they too long? Too many people or too few? Lets hear what you've got to say

Crono

------

That writer does the most, who gives his reader the most knowledge, and takes from him the least time.
-- In: M. Mazzoni : Fiori e glorie della letteratura inglese, Milano, 1844, Part II, p. 68

------------------

(In response to Ankles, again)

In keeping with (and reasserting) what lumisa said above - fun is the most important thing. There is a fine line beween managing and micro-managing, especially in a game like this. I personally think (though I haven't made any for a while) that you are doing a good job - and I really enjoy the 'final round play-offs' you have. I think the mixture of "all vs all" and then ending with that made things much better (and more fun!).

------------------

Quote

Originally posted by Crono:
**(In response to Ankles, again)

In keeping with (and reasserting) what lumisa said above - fun is the most important thing. There is a fine line beween managing and micro-managing, especially in a game like this. I personally think (though I haven't made any for a while) that you are doing a good job - and I really enjoy the 'final round play-offs' you have. I think the mixture of "all vs all" and then ending with that made things much better (and more fun!).**

If there is someone that hates micro-managing, it is me. Right now I am just taking the wait and see approach. I still haven't heard back from certain people. We will see how next week's tournament goes, and we will know where to go from there.

------------------
I am the fox, let my talk will thrill you, when you get to know me, my smile will chill you. With a name like anklebiter, just what did you expect? (url="http://"http://www.foxchange.com/~matt/anklecam/")web cam(/url)

since i´ld really like to play tournaments with ALL of the pop-poppers in the future and without having to chose on which side i stand (if that happens i am not going to play anymore), i think it is very important to try and collect all the different ideas for tournament rules here, and make the final tournament rules in a way everybody likes them (excuse me if i repeat myself).
there shouldn´t be any room for discussing the rules DURING the tournament: the rules should cover all possible events that might occur during the tournament (ties, number of players...etc). the host should be like a groupier in a casino, who just does what he has to do and can´t be made responsible for anything (otherwise they´ld be in an awful situation and the goal for every unsatisfied or irritated player - and it should be fun hosting the tournament as well as playing it).
so, to make a start - here again (!) are my ideas:
-there should ALWAYS be a second round and then a final (as long as it´s more than 4 players)
-if there is a tie between two of those first 4 (err...it would be 5 then..), these two should play another game.
-the host should NOT be allowed to make sudden changes (and if the rules were clear he wouldn´t ever have a reason to do so)
-no "demos". it takes soo long, and they can register. maybe it makes it even more interesting.
anklebiter, what do you think? lish? anybody??

please, if we get the rules right TOGETHER, it won´t matter WHO hosts the tournaments because he or she is just following OUR rules and players AND host will be able to enjoy it, or if they don´t it will be for other reasons.
i would never want to host a tournament if there was even the smallest risk of everybody being angry at me afterwards.
normally i don´t get involved in things like this too much, but i still have a very awkward feeling about all this, and it would be sooo sad if we didn´t have anymore FUN-tournaments or even fun games anymore! i would have to look for a new addiction!! horrible!

------------------

(This message has been edited by lumisa (edited 03-22-2003).)

::canning the Japanese, Ryoko dons her 'serious' hat and tries to talk sensibly for once::

Quote

Originally posted by lumisa:
**since i´ld really like to play tournaments with ALL of the pop-poppers in the future and without having to chose on which side i stand (if that happens i am not going to play anymore), i think it is very important to try and collect all the different ideas for tournament rules here, and make the final tournament rules in a way everybody likes them (excuse me if i repeat myself).
**

I fully agree, but I don't understand where this 'split' is. All I can see from talking to people is that there was some disagreement between Hyko &/ LISH, and anklebiter? Is anyone actually going to explain exactly what happened or do we have to all guess the solution for a problem we don't know?

There seem to be precious few people online at the moment, and I think if you pull out lumisa, I'll probably follow suit. Probably won't be anybody left. Haven't seen Hyko around except if he's playing you - or coming to tell me off for being drunk on the board. (In fairness, I was, so he is justified, but still...) Goodness knows I ought to stop pestering Crono to use his computer all the time when he needs it for work.

So, lumisa, can you expand a little on what these 'sides' actually are? I know we talked a little about it online, but I didn't see things as being that serious. Also, I hope you're feeling better now?

Quote

Originally posted by lumisa:
**there shouldn´t be any room for discussing the rules DURING the tournament: the rules should cover all possible events that might occur during the tournament (ties, number of players...etc). the host should be like a groupier in a casino, who just does what he has to do and can´t be made responsible for anything (otherwise they´ld be in an awful situation and the goal for every unsatisfied or irritated player - and it should be fun hosting the tournament as well as playing it).
so, to make a start
**

This whole things seems to be down to people changing the rules half way through. The last tournament I played in, I won the first round outright - I didn't lose a game. I was then asked to play Hyko. Neither of us were sure whether this was an actual second round match, or whether Anklebiter had not got our results properly and asked for a rematch. We presumed the "you win if you win all your matches" rule would stop the extra rounds. I don't actually care myself, since I also am all in favour of the tournament rounds myself, and equally couldn't care less about winning. Especially as I don't even have an Apple computer to play the prize game on anyway.

So then there was no third round! What happened? Again, I just went with whatever was said, but I was confused as to what was happening. Rules should be followed, and in that one, neither the 'winner of all rounds wins outright' nor the '3rd round final winner wins' rules came into effect. We had something in between... More importantly, nobody said what was happening, or why. Or at least not until afterwards? I can't even remember now.

So what? Well, from what I (in my admittedly very limited wisdom) can make out - the same sort of thing happened last tournament too. Obviously someone went back on the rules during it (again) and this time, somebody got offended &/ confused. Come on, we're all grown-ups aren't we? Anklebiter, no offence meant, but from what I can hear, you are sounding very defensive about something that could easily just have been solved by 'Sorry, I think we need do something different his time because <insert reason here>' rather than just doing something different and pilling in to people who suddenly don't understand. Maybe that's not the case - maybe it is - but either way, why don't you mail whoever it was - after all, you must have their addr from when they posted their results, ne? And then they can mail you and we can all cry how sorry we are to each other and get back to being a community again?

Quote

Originally posted by lumisa:
**please, if we get the rules right TOGETHER, it won´t matter WHO hosts the tournaments because he or she is just following OUR rules and players AND host will be able to enjoy it, or if they don´t it will be for other reasons.
i would never want to host a tournament if there was even the smallest risk of everybody being angry at me afterwards.
normally i don´t get involved in things like this too much, but i still have a very awkward feeling about all this, and it would be sooo sad if we didn´t have anymore FUN-tournaments or even fun games anymore! i would have to look for a new addiction!! horrible!

**

Now, as to rules - again, I don't really care, so anything goes. As long as we have something that does encompass all eventualities. It would be very easy to rig up a website that automates this whole thing. I live in a house with 2 software engineers, and have a fair smattering of PHP myself. Shoes also has his excellent 'allyourscoresarebelongtous' site too - there's no shortage of skill available to set up a server whereby you mail your scores in a simple format, and it either messages you back saying you had an error, or automatically enters them into a table you can then see instantly online. For security, it can wait until it has confirmation of the score from the person you were playing. Really, really, stupidly easy. It could even request a resend or rematch if the two cannot decide on scores. Since it knows your email address (because you just sent it your results) it can mail you to tell you to replay - or just log it to the public view page.

Further - it could then automatically assign a knock-out tree based on hard and fast rules that have been given to it before - and since it's all obvious and online, there doesn't need to be anyone in the chat having to direct.

Probably be a lot quicker too. Just an idea - and yes, it does maybe lack the human touch a bit, but... it would work, and stop the complaints.

Quote

Originally posted by lumisa:
**here again (!) are my ideas:
-there should ALWAYS be a second round and then a final (as long as it´s more than 4 players)
-if there is a tie between two of those first 4 (err...it would be 5 then..), these two should play another game.
-the host should NOT be allowed to make sudden changes (and if the rules were clear he wouldn´t ever have a reason to do so)
-no "demos". it takes soo long, and they can register. maybe it makes it even more interesting.
anklebiter, what do you think? lish? anybody??
**

- I like the extra knockout rounds too
- ties need to be resolved some way - round difference is probably easiest, or who actually beat who if that ties. If all else fails, a rematch (or probably a three way rematch, since you'd need at least a three way tie to fail the former two rules) could be played. Doesn't matter anyway, as long as people know!
- host not changing... blah blah... just dealt with all that ad infinatum
- I disagree about demos somewhat here - true, they should register, but it might be fun for them to play too. Doesn't take that long - besides... I cleared in 9 secs on 'hard' against one today ^__^ - didn't take too long! Or perhaps if the tournaments were less frequent, they would have enough time to get registration codes through? Either way, I think it is important to have as wide a skill range as possible competing.

(This message has been edited by Ryoko (edited 03-22-2003).)

The rules really didn't change. I just changed the wording to protect myself. I mean, this next tournament will be no different then the last. Do you guys see what I am saying?

I do think demo players should be allowed. The rule about the host being able to change anything, that falls in with the above. I doubt I would ever actually use it.

The only reason I didn't have a round 2 last time off the bat was Lumsia won all six games, with some people winning 4 behind her. Now, for future games, I agree to let a second round happen anyways.

------------------
I am the fox, let my talk will thrill you, when you get to know me, my smile will chill you. With a name like anklebiter, just what did you expect? (url="http://"http://www.foxchange.com/~matt/anklecam/")web cam(/url)

so i guess, since noone else posts here, there´s no disagreement anymore?! everybody trusts the next tournament to be exactly as they will like it? nothing better to add about tournament rules or tournaments in general?anybody??
well, that sounds great - i am really looking forward to the next one now. very glad we talked about it.
see you all there,
Lumsia

(This message has been edited by lumisa (edited 03-23-2003).)

Quote

Originally posted by lumisa:
**so i guess, since noone else posts here, there´s no disagreement anymore?! everybody trusts the next tournament to be exactly as they will like it? nothing better to add about tournament rules or tournaments in general?
**

Speaking for myself you are absolutely right. I appreciate very much the input of you, Crono and Ryoko (and of course anklebiters efforts as host of tournaments). And everyone of you has made some very true and important statements on this threat. But having read the web board guidelines which say: "Avoid posting "Me Too" messages" I was a little bit insecure, what to post. But since my response was expected, here it is.

I'm not the right person for tournament politics because I don't really care about them anyway. I didn't play tournaments when I was really into playing poppop – back in 2002 The reason for my decision then was that in my eyes tourneys made people a little bit too competitive for my taste and I got just sick of all those bad losers that mingle in the poppop lounge. Everybody takes a win or lose as if it was a question of vital importance – it's incredible. I myself wasn't an exception... Nowadays that I've got over my "adducktion" I play tournaments just for fun AND that there is one player more you can beat Back to the conflict here: to say the truth and without wanting to offend anybody: in my eyes all this whole thing is about, is that somebody was disappointed that he didn't win and thought that he was treaded unfair.

If you are interested in my opinion about the rules:

- Yes, I would let them happen less often to make them more like a special event

- I would "allow" demo players to play, but only in expert level. If they don't play well, 3 minutes are time enough to beat them, if they play well as i.e. bluepot did, you can simply rehost after every round. After all I think that there cannot be different difficult levels in one tourney.

- Of course rules have to be clear before the tournament. No doubt about that fact

- In a tie solution round results should count. If that doesn't help regame as lumisa and Ryoko said.

- right now I cannot think of anything else important to say

But once more I'd like to point out that I always had a lot of fun in the tourneys ankles and number279 hostet. And I never really was affected by any rules that wasn't 100% what I would have liked it to be like. I.E. never met a demo playing hard mode, etc...

Hope we get this thing straight and see each other in the lounge

------------------

Quote

Originally posted by lumisa:
**
there shouldn´t be any room for discussing the rules DURING the tournament: the rules should cover all possible events that might occur during the tournament (ties, number of players...etc). the host should be like a groupier in a casino, who just does what he has to do and can´t be made responsible for anything (otherwise they´ld be in an awful situation and the goal for every unsatisfied or irritated player - and it should be fun hosting the tournament as well as playing it).
so, to make a start - here again (!) are my ideas:
-there should ALWAYS be a second round and then a final (as long as it´s more than 4 players)
-if there is a tie between two of those first 4 (err...it would be 5 then..), these two should play another game.
-the host should NOT be allowed to make sudden changes (and if the rules were clear he wouldn´t ever have a reason to do so)
-no "demos". it takes soo long, and they can register. maybe it makes it even more interesting.
**

Absolutely agree.
Each and every single word.

Plus:
- An alternative for ties: compare rounds and/or check out who beat who
- to leave out registration
- to leave out "the winner of a tourney gotta win each match"-stuff
- to leave out any prices
- if two player can't join one another's game - to split the points into halfs

oh, BTW @ Mikrisa:

- yeah, you're right, I was a little disappointed making second place three times, never the first - but really: only a little. It is only an online game, not RL.
- no, you're wrong, that wasn't my point un this situation at all. It was about behaviour, not about winning.

------------------
cya
/Lish

Quote

Originally posted by Lish:
**
Plus:
- An alternative for ties: compare rounds and/or check out who beat who **

He? Check who beat who? That would be an totally questionable rule and would cause new trouble. But probably I misunderstand what you wanted to say...

Quote

Originally posted by Lish:
- to leave out registration

I think registrations are good: The host gets at least an idea of how many players are going to join. So he could cancel a tournament if not enough players. Another side effect of registration: Last tournament I really wasn't in the mood for playing, but then thought: "Well, I have registered, they are expecting me. Buck up and play." Maybe we could leave out "including full name" as that might keep people from registering. Though in the past hosts didn't reject any registrations with only screen names

Quote

Originally posted by Lish:
- to leave out "the winner of a tourney gotta win each match"-stuff

Anyway invalid if the "there always will be a second round-rule will be resolved. Though I think that rule might lead to results that do not really mirror true mastery I leave that decision to those who might lose a tournament because of that rule

Quote

Originally posted by Lish:
- to leave out any prices

Why that? What do you have against prices? I admit I don't think they are necessary, but it is a very nice side effect. And it might motivate new players to take part. And as long as there is a random drawing, even everybody has a chance to get a price, which I BTW very much appreciated

Quote

Originally posted by Lish:
- if two player can't join one another's game - to split the points into halfs

I don´t see any reason why we should decide on that rule. Besides it never ever happened to me, I know that it happened to you, but I think for computer problems. In my eyes everybody himself is responsible to get his computer working properly. Just like in sports: if Michael Schumacher's car brakes down, he is out and not asked to drive the lacking rounds again next day ... Anyway this rule could lead to ridiculous results: somebody that hardly played any game might get a higher ranking then somebody that played every round but didn´t win the games. I don´t quite see how to solve that problem, but giving points, not even half points for nothing cannot be the solution. In sports that problem would be solved easily with disqualification, but I´d rather count it as a lose. So you´ve still got a chance to win. If Player A wins 5:2 and player B wins 5:1 and cannot play the 7th game, it would be a tie. In this case as you cannot count round results, there would have to be a regame between A and B. Besides that we should contact tech support and check for which reason that problem occurs. If you know the reason you can react and get you systems work right. The host then should also know the solution or at least where it can be found (link to tech support) and be able to give the players a helping hand. That way everything should be going smoothly

------------------

BTW I always wondered why the guys being most busy posting on this web board hardly ever were seen on the tracker. Now I know. They just didn't have any time left for playing

------------------

Connection failures seem to be peculiar to LISH - I think there is something very worng with either his ISP or his router. Since (I understand) his router is a Windoze box then that stands to reason Either way, the solution (given he seems unable to fix his end of the story) is to open port 33333 on your own router for UDP connections.

------------------

Quote

Originally posted by Crono:
Connection failures seem to be peculiar to LISH - I think there is something very worng with either his ISP or his router. Since (I understand) his router is a Windoze box then that stands to reason

Hey, hey! Ok it is no G4 Dual Gig, it is only a slow 266 Mhz-Intel-Computer; but no windows on this machine!
Linux-fli4l (the floppy-OS) - plus some RAM, 2 Network-PCI-Cards and no HD.
Not even a fan!
But I guess this is probably not the problem.

Quote

**
Either way, the solution (given he seems unable to fix his end of the story) is to open port 33333 on your own router for UDP connections.
**

Thx for the hints Crono!
But I already did ...
Also some other ports, people suggested me.
Nothing worked.

On the other hand, once more I am not really sure, if it is a very good idea, to participate in further tourneys.
Rules I think about are not too pupular round here and to be honest: I realized, that a lot of trouble is around those events and I am too often in it.
I just can hold my mouth shut, you all know that! especially, when I find something unfair.
And most of all - for me it just not worth it.

One more reason is (last one, I promise! ) is that the combination MyVeryMac/MyMouse/OSX/Pop-Pop definitely sux (very high bat-latency and crappiest framerates ever) and that I did anything to work it out.
In vein again.

So - we'll see.
Wait for better times, better rules, OSX 10.3, IntelliPoint-Drivers and pop-pop 1.0.3

Sounds pretty awful & winey, I know ...
But I didn't mean that!!!
Just the fu**in' way it is, sorry.

cu in the lounge, everybody
/Lish

Quote

Originally posted by Lish:
I just can hold my mouth shut, you all know that! especially, when I find something unfair.
And most of all - for me it just not worth it.

CAN'T of course I meant CAN'T!!

Quote

Originally posted by Lish:
On the other hand, once more I am not really sure, if it is a very good idea, to participate in further tourneys.
Rules I think about are not too pupular round here and to be honest: I realized, that a lot of trouble is around those events and I am too often in it.

but that is exactly the reason why we are discussing this here!?! to make the rules better and fairer, and to prevent "trouble"!
i would find it very sad if you didn´t play anymore, and again i apologize for being "a bit" impatient. that was the first flu i ever had that started during a tournament, and i promise that will not happen again. i´ll attend the next tournament as cheerfull, happy and healthy as possible (btw thats what i felt like in the beginning of the tournament).
so that would mean: safe rules, a delightful Lumisa - what else would you need for a good tournament??

oh - i have to admit - i might get impatient again if people i have to play the next round, are chatting with others, and i have no idea what´s going on, how long it´s going to take, or if they just can´t see the game i´m hosting. so, even if i found the rule "keep chat to a minimum" quite silly in the beginning, now i think it is a good rule - it just shouldn´t have to be written down, because it should be a normal act of politeness.
------------------

(This message has been edited by lumisa (edited 03-24-2003).)

Other things to try regarding connection problems are disabling client-side RIP and forwarding all unknown connections from the router to your computer on the same ports (assuming you have that functionality, not all do, but as a linux box, natd should offer it) This is not just for you though, but (along with the port 33333 enabling) goes for anyone else who is having trouble connecting to you / other people.

Quote

Originally posted by lumisa:
**so that would mean: safe rules, a delightful Lumisa - what else would you need for a good tournament??;)
**

That would indeed make a perfect tournament, dear (delightful) lumisa

Quote

Originally posted by lumisa:

**oh - i have to admit - i might get impatient again if people i have to play the next round, are chatting with others, and i have no idea what´s going on, how long it´s going to take, or if they just can´t see the game i´m hosting. so, even if i found the rule "keep chat to a minimum" quite silly in the beginning, now i think it is a good rule - it just shouldn´t have to be written down, because it should be a normal act of politeness.
**

Exactly, it's just common sense really. Though if we have any more of those 7 min rounds, who knows... Incidentally, that addition was highly freaky, as when I clicked 'reply' it wasn't there, but when the reply page loaded, there it was in the text area!

(This message has been edited by Crono (edited 03-24-2003).)

(quote)Originally posted by lumisa:
**
... and again i apologize for being "a bit" impatient. that was the first flu i ever had that started during a tournament, and i promise that will not happen again. i´ll attend the next tournament as cheerfull, happy and healthy as possible (btw thats what i felt like in the beginning of the tournament).** (QUOTE)
Oh come on lumisa, this is silly now!
You exactly know that is not a bit of what it's all about, don't you?
I never had a problem with your flu or impacience - you are absolutly alright, don't worry ...
(QUOTE)
so that would mean: safe rules,(/quote)
rules are like laws - always in need to be interpreted, I'm afraid ...
**(quote)
a delightful Lumisa - what else would you need for a good tournament??
**(/quote)
I guess it's more about what I do not need - I guess most of you know and some even agree what I am talkin' about.

------------------
cya
/Lish

Is there anybody who can in a very short form summarize the current status of this discussion and more important the current status of the tournament-rules?
It seems that many people did not have enough time to write their opinions in short form

(Please do not wrap/oversee the smileys)

Long time ago SHOES and I discussed about systems to track results of pop-pop games. SHOES was the first to make one real. This weekend I was searching for a task to avoid myself from doing things I actually had to do. So I made my first steps with PHP and mySQL (I only knew ASP/VB before) and programmed a tourney-system which up to now is able to completely support the tourneyhost during the first round.

It provides the following functions for the host:
- Create a new tourney with status "open" where registered users can sign in
- Change the status to "closed" if no further users should be able to sign in
- Change the status to "in progress" to allow those players who signed in to the tourney to report their results
- During Tourneys the host can sign in additional (e.g. late players) or sign out other players
- Check and manipulate all results of the tournament. Host will get a warning if opponents reported different results
- Change status "to finished" if all scores should be frozen
- Change status of tourney to "canceled" if it will not take place

and this functions for Players:
- Register
- Sign in to tourneys which are open
- Sign out from tourneys which are open
- Report and edit results for tourneys "in progress" to which they signed in
- View the Table of the first round (Place|Name|Games played, won, lost|Rounds won, lost, diff)

The system has the goal to support the host, not to automate everything. And since the first round is the one with the most effort for the host, i thought we could start with this KISS system. BTW: Funny that I saw Ryoko's post not before i was already working on it, so I think she will like it too, although i don't think that the whole thing is that easy as she said ;-).

You can play around in my first public version under:
(url="http://"http://www.flashracer.com/pop-pop/")http://www.flashracer.com/pop-pop/(/url)

I will send anklebiter a mail with a password to have host-rights.

I am looking forward to your feedback, although we can only see it's workability in a real tourney. Maybe it makes sense to open a new thread for it.

Until now NO DESIGN, NO HELPFUNCTIONS, NO MANUAL

And here are some screenshots of screens which cannot always been seen by all:
The Mainscreen of a host: (url="http://"http://www.flashracer.com/pop-pop/screenshots/hostmain.jpg")http://www.flashrace...ts/hostmain.jpg(/url)

The result-check-screen of a host: (url="http://"http://www.flashracer.com/pop-pop/screenshots/hostcheckresults.jpg")http://www.flashrace...heckresults.jpg(/url)

The Player's result reporting screen: (url="http://"http://www.flashracer.com/pop-pop/screenshots/reportresult.jpg")http://www.flashrace...eportresult.jpg(/url)

------------------

(This message has been edited by Hyko (edited 03-25-2003).)