Backgammon Online

19-Jan-2010
08:32 PST

No problems with Gameknot either, but the options are already there to make small notes, which, to me, seems very much in sinc with this fast game!

30-May-2011
14:20 PST

The last post on this thread was over a year ago, so I think its probably pretty safe to say that the introduction of the 'chat' feature on ZE has gone over pretty well. Or at least there aren't the rampant abuses of it that some feared. Well done, ZE!

And the introduction of the 'friends' feature is also appreciated. I know that I've been chatting with several ZE friends here that have turned into actual friends. Its a small world...

How many times has anyone else typed a lengthy (or even not so lengthy) reply to a chat, made your move, hit submit, and then realized that you didn't hit 'send' and its gone? I realize that it wouldn't take much for us to get by with the system as it is, but could hitting 'submit' for your move, ALSO act as the 'send' for the chats? Pretty please???

Anyone else? Bueller? Bueller?

30-May-2011
15:00 PST

I think the "chat" feature of this site is excellent and I agree with pokhra on both counts: ZE friends have turned into actual friends; and I too have forgotten to hit "send" on numerous occasions. I would add another 'pretty please' to pokhra's suggestion that messages are sent automatically when we hit "submit".

30-May-2011
17:10 PST

The chat feature really has made this a closer community for me! I found some very good light conversations as well as deep conversations with many players on ZE. The suggestion to automatically send the chat text when clicking the Submit button would be very welcome. There have been many times that I've typed a message then moved on to play the game without clicking Send and smacking myself in the middle of my forehead for neglecting it shouting "DOH!"

31-May-2011
04:52 PST

I agree! I hope ZE sees this - I know they said to put all requests in the ZE improvements thread.

04-Jun-2011
22:23 PST

When ZE started the site improvement thread, the first response was about the messaging feature. I know because I posted it. In my post I suggested placing the message/chat box to the right of the game board where it would be visible with the game. This would remove the need to scroll down to check for messages. Since that time (almost a year ago) there have been a number of posts that address some aspect of the message feature. I would expect any improvements to this feature will come as a complete package when all aspects of this issue have been resolved. The primary concern, in my opinion, is one of messaging vs. chat. Chat is a real time activity, a conversation between individuals that usually ends when one party sends a GTG, talk to ya later type of statement. Messages, however, are usually sent without expectation of an immediate reply if any at all.
Considering the fast pace of game play , (submit your move and the next game appears) messaging is sufficient. Make it visible with the game(no need to scroll) and dummy proof with submit to send feature. So what's the holdup? What to do for those players who would like to chat? You can't say hello to someone thru a message board. In fact, any thing more than a "Good luck " or "You got me good that time" just doesn't feel right, especially when you get a response three days later. How do you tell people who use your site to go elsewhere if you want to get social? You don't. At best, you can avoid the subject and those who want that will resign themselves to "just play the game" OR you can give them what they want witch will make the site more attractive to the masses which flock toward the various social sites on the Internet. Here's what I'd suggest (finally huh, and yes Saurus, they will read this thread. The number of responses, currency of posts and the fact that the member who initiated the thread (lilwarrior) holds 8 out of 18 of their posted records should flag it for attention!) My suggestion to ZE is to create a separate "room" setup to cater those of us who would like to play in a more social environment. This room would feature one on one real-time game play with adjacent chat window and the ability "play now" from a list of open seats (regulated by player criteria). In this room, I'm playing one game at a time with the option to converse with my opponent. Ideally I would be able to play my active games in another window at the same time . Other creative minds can suggest features that would make this room the place to go! Is it even feasible in the realms of programming and profitability?

07-Jun-2011
02:47 PST

My computer at work blocks anything that is real-time and only allows HTML. It would definitely have to be a separate room, or I suspect that many players will be blocked.

Not that I, nor anyone else plays backgammon at work... Just saying!  

10-Jun-2011
15:58 PST

Our fix for this will be to warn you that you have an unsent message before submitting your turn. Then you will have a chance to either edit, send or cancel the message. We expect the fix to be in place soon as it is in the testing phase right now.

10-Jun-2011
16:22 PST

ZE - This seems like a decent compromise if the programming to make the submit button function as the send button as well is too complicated. (And I am the LAST person that should weigh in on what is or is not complicated.) So thank you.

My two cents on the fix while it is in testing is 1) please make sure that the message isn't lost if someone hits the submit button before send and has to go back, and 2) has there been any thought on the discussion about putting the newest comments at the top of the list? That is, in reverse order so they are right at the bottom of the board where they are likeliest to be seen?

Thanks for continuing to make the site a better place to play BG!

Lance
aka Pokhra

10-Jun-2011
16:33 PST

The compromise is for two reasons:

1) Sending a message and submitting a turn are two separate paths so they would have to be merged, which would involve significant changes for the occasional case of forgetting to submit a message.

2) We are erring on the side of caution in that we prefer to not guess what a user intends to do -- there is always the possibility that the user didn't want to send the message.

Indeed, we will ensure that the message isn't lost when giving you the warning about the message not being sent, since this is the main concern  

As far as sorting the messages, there has been no discussion about reversing the order, but that may be something that can utilize the sorting features that already exist. We will investigate this.