[Walddk]

mrdct, on Jul 23 2006, 01:42 PM, said:

You are on shakey ground FSKOUL (whoever you may be).

The main point Roland was making was that people should be free to choose how, who, when and where they watch their vugraph.  Obviously, if Zia was in the theatre more people would be in there listening to his sage words, but that neither belittles the actual commentators in Sydney nor overstates the abilities of the online commentators.

Exactly my point. I am not amused by the load of rubbish fskoul pours out. For a start I pay all my expenses myself and I work 100s of hours on BBO for absolutely nothing.

Next summer I am going to help the juniors for a week at a camp in Bristol, England. I insist on paying all expenses myself, and I will not get paid to give talks, lectures, whatever.

Do you too, fskoul?

Roland

[mrdct]

A little birdie has told me that FSKOUL is in fact a fellow called Fotis Skoularikis who was in Sydney to do the web-layout for the WBF website (not to be confused with the local website that had realtime scores and other timely information). This role was, of course, in addition to the bulletin layout editor, bulletin editor and bulletin co-editor.

Can anyone tell me why you need to have the WBF web stuff done onsite?

The other thing I can't work out is why Greece is so disproportionately represented amongst the WBF staff at the World Youth?

[hrothgar]

Few comments here:

I agree that the WBF went to a lot of effort and expense to provide a traditional Vugraph at the event. You had a number of good commentators speaking to a (largely) empty audience. The vast majority of the players preferred to watch the matches on local PCs running BBO. (It was also quite clear that banning players from using BBO in the cyber cafe was an attempt to herd players into the lecture hall)

In My Humble Opinion, the primary difference was not one of quality, but rather the formality and flexibility. Each local PC became a cluster for 5-6 players who could immediately jump to whichever match they found most interesting. There was no dependency on the folks running the main Vugraph. Equally significant, the local PCs were very social affairs. Most everyone was commenting on the bididng and play, joking arround, and causing a small scall ruckus. While this type of behaviour is lots of fun when confined to a small group, it would have been entirely inappropriate during the larger "lecture" formats because folks would have disturbed the proceedings.

[fskoul]

Walddk, on Jul 23 2006, 06:56 AM, said:

mrdct, on Jul 23 2006, 01:42 PM, said:

You are on shakey ground FSKOUL (whoever you may be).

The main point Roland was making was that people should be free to choose how, who, when and where they watch their vugraph.  Obviously, if Zia was in the theatre more people would be in there listening to his sage words, but that neither belittles the actual commentators in Sydney nor overstates the abilities of the online commentators.

Exactly my point. I am not amused by the load of rubbish fskoul pours out. For a start I pay all my expenses myself and I work 100s of hours on BBO for absolutely nothing.

Next summer I am going to help the juniors for a week at a camp in Bristol, England. I insist on paying all expenses myself, and I will not get paid to give talks, lectures, whatever.

Do you too, fskoul?

Roland

EDIT: The post has been deleted with apologies for rude expression.

Fotis Skoularikis

[david_c]

fskoul, on Jul 23 2006, 11:35 AM, said:

Don't flatter yourself for the quality of the comments - just remember that it was just the opportunity for the players to watch another match than the presented one, in most cases the match of THEIR country.

What on earth are people finding so offensive about this?

It makes a perfectly valid point that the commentary is unlikely to be the reason people are choosing to watch different vugraph to the onsite presentation. "Don't flatter yourself" is normal English idiom, and a totally inoffensive choice of phrase. It simply means "beware not to present this as evidence you are doing something right."

[Walddk]

fskoul, on Jul 23 2006, 02:21 PM, said:

Walddk, on Jul 23 2006, 06:56 AM, said:

mrdct, on Jul 23 2006, 01:42 PM, said:

You are on shakey ground FSKOUL (whoever you may be).

The main point Roland was making was that people should be free to choose how, who, when and where they watch their vugraph.  Obviously, if Zia was in the theatre more people would be in there listening to his sage words, but that neither belittles the actual commentators in Sydney nor overstates the abilities of the online commentators.

Exactly my point. I am not amused by the load of rubbish fskoul pours out. For a start I pay all my expenses myself and I work 100s of hours on BBO for absolutely nothing.

Next summer I am going to help the juniors for a week at a camp in Bristol, England. I insist on paying all expenses myself, and I will not get paid to give talks, lectures, whatever.

Do you too, fskoul?

Roland

Obviously you are expert in twisting words - otherwise you wouldn't 1) cut a phrase in the middle, and 2) accuse somebody for a personal assault that never happened. Let me refresh your memory:

You invented a post stating that there will be no BBO coverage in Bangkok (proven untrue). Later you showed uncalled sympathy for the tons of outrageous and insulting remarks that were posted. Later you invented that last year in Syndney there was some kind of attack on the BBO transmission (when it was very clear that the problem was with the Internet connection). You insulted the onsite commentators, i.e. people with much longer history than yours, like Barry Regal. And finally, when someone dared to tell you that it was not the comments that attracted people but the opportunity to watch their country playing, you CUT A PHRASE IN THE MIDDLE and twisted it. Excellent job sir! Is this some kind of standard?

Don't worry, you can easily release your pets on me - I have no problem at all. Especially when they come and invent some additional phantasies to back up their claims (like the 4 directors, for example).

Rest assured that it is only YOU that claim that you are the only one to care about this game. All others that have invented much of their personnal time, many times without a fee, can't be compared with you. Sorry I can no longer watch your line of thoughts - I am currently busy on trying to take advantage from bridge for my personal benefits (for your standards that wasn't an insult, of course).

And (not to make the effort to look for my name in BBO, where it is clearly stated), I will include here for your convenience.

Fotis Skoularikis

For some reason you didn't answer the very interesting question:

Do you also pay all your expenses yourself when you work for the WBF and EBL? I can reveal that I have inside information, but I will be happy to hear it from yourself.

Roland

[Walddk]

david_c, on Jul 23 2006, 02:25 PM, said:

fskoul, on Jul 23 2006, 11:35 AM, said:

Don't flatter yourself for the quality of the comments - just remember that it was just the opportunity for the players to watch another match than the presented one, in most cases the match of THEIR country.

What on earth are people finding so offensive about this?

It makes a perfectly valid point that the commentary is unlikely to be the reason people are choosing to watch different vugraph to the onsite presentation. "Don't flatter yourself" is normal English idiom, and a totally inoffensive choice of phrase. It simply means "beware not to present this as evidence you are doing something right."

Fine David, but we must be doing something right. History speaks for itself. The WBF, however, does a lot of things wrong. First of all because too many are pretty clueless and don't realise what's in the best interests for BRIDGE!

One issue is that it's not in the best interests of bridge to stay in suites in 5* hotels with family attached!

Roland

[fskoul]

mrdct, on Jul 23 2006, 07:20 AM, said:

Can anyone tell me why you need to have the WBF web stuff done onsite?

The other thing I can't work out is why Greece is so disproportionately represented amongst the WBF staff at the World Youth?

I am again 100% with you my friend - I never wanted and never want generally to go to any event at all - my job can be done equally well from home. Alas, you somehow forget the "small" difference in time between the WBF Internet office and Sydney - just something like 8 hours, if I remember well. I am sure you wouldn't mind to live in the nights and sleep in the day, but some of us have a small problem with that.

Can you stop saying nonsenses pls?

[Joe de Balliol]

Walddk, on Jul 23 2006, 05:05 AM, said:

fskoul, on Jul 23 2006, 11:51 AM, said:

Quote

As for the impact on the onsite commentators, the WBF should be more concerned about the commentators usually outnumbering the spectators.

And that EXACTLY was the reason why it was FORBIDDEN to the players to watch VG on the provided PCs - which happened quite early in the event. Thus leaving only one place to watch VG - the VG room.

Come on, be real now. You just don't forbid anyone to watch vugraph on the computer in order to make them go to the vugraph theatre instead. This is a simple question of supply and demand.

If the internet coverage is better, you should certainly prefer that, and vice versa obviously. No-one should decide what's best for the juniors (or anyone else for that matter). They are old enough to decide for themselves. If the commentators are good enough, the spectators on site will flock to the vugraph theatre.

The only positive I can deduce from this is that people must have thought that the BBO presentation was better. That makes us all feel good.

Roland

In Riccione for the European Youth Championships last summer, the organisers noted that there were long queues of people waiting to email friends back home, who couldn't use the computers because people were on BBO, so they decided to ban BBO use. It didn't stop BBO being used altogether, but imo it would have been better if they'd uninstalled it from the machines.

Ditto Slovakia: people could play as much bridge as they wanted, but instead some people decided to play on BBO on the four computers that had to serve hundreds of juniors.

J

[Walddk]

Post deleted by Walddk on July 23 at 21.10 CET

[mrdct]

fskoul, on Jul 23 2006, 07:21 AM, said:

Don't worry, you can easily release your pets on me - I have no problem at all. Especially when they come and invent some additional phantasies to back up their claims (like the 4 directors, for example).

Now I am outraged! Are you calling me one of Roland's pets?

For the record, the FOUR directors in Sydney were:

Richard GRENSIDE, Marc van BEIJSTERVELDT, Laurie KELSO and Chris DIMENT. Whether or not Chris was an "official" director is moot as he was in the SINGLE PLAYING ROOM (there were not separate open and closed rooms in Sydney) at all times during play and I personally observed him making rulings and conferring with the other directors on rulings.

Perhaps we should move this discussion to a "Fotis is a #$%@head" thread.

[fskoul]

mrdct, on Jul 23 2006, 07:45 AM, said:

fskoul, on Jul 23 2006, 07:21 AM, said:

Don't worry, you can easily release your pets on me - I have no problem at all. Especially when they come and invent some additional phantasies to back up their claims (like the 4 directors, for example).

Now I am outraged! Are you calling me one of Roland's pets?

For the record, the FOUR directors in Sydney were:

Richard GRENSIDE, Marc van BEIJSTERVELDT, Laurie KELSO and Chris DIMENT. Whether or not Chris was an "official" director is moot as he was in the SINGLE PLAYING ROOM (there were not separate open and closed rooms in Sydney) at all times during play and I personally observed him making rulings and conferring with the other directors on rulings.

Perhaps we should move this discussion to a "Fotis is a #$%@head" thread.

There are other people who were also involved in TD decisions, like Dimitris Ballas. That doesn't make them directors.

Anyway, and since my phrase was quite rude, I apologize for my use of words.

EDIT: PS. Chris Diment was the Main Office Supervisor and also Press Room manager in Sydney. If you really want to see who was doing what in this event, you can visit http://www.worldbridge.org/competitions/wo...?qmenudetid=368.

[fskoul]

I must include also in my apologies Roland - of course my use of words was rude to him too. Really sorry.

[Walddk]

fskoul, on Jul 23 2006, 03:07 PM, said:

I must include also in my apologies Roland - of course my use of words was rude to him too. Really sorry.

Apology accepted, and then I can apologise for some of the remarks I made about Fotis. He has assured me that his work is directed at the best interests of bridge (BBO included), and I trust him.

Roland

[geller]

Now that we're all friends again, I want to repeat my comment from upthread.

Quote

Also, once the organizers sign a contract with a hotel they are at the mercy of the hotel's standard (extortionate) fees for net access, but if this is negotiated with the venue before the contract is signed a much better deal should be available.

I think this is very important. If VuGraph is regarded as an integral part of the requirements, high speed internet access can be included as one of the requirements to be met by the hotel in their bid. In other words, no high speed net access means you won't use their hotel. If that's done from the onset, the hotel will be reasonable. Whereas once you sign the basic contract they can gouge you to their heart's content. I wish all tourney organizers would keep this in mind.

[Walddk]

Dear WBF and EBL,

Employ a full-time vugraph coordinator, for on site as well as internet presentations. He or she could work for both organisations, and in my opinion it would be money well spent.

There must surely be other areas where you can cut down. We have heard about a few issues in this thread for example. I know it's hard for you to see the wisdom of this (many have tried many times already), but there is no law against keep trying.

Roland

[fskoul]

Walddk, on Jul 23 2006, 09:03 AM, said:

Dear WBF and EBL,

Employ a full-time vugraph coordinator, for on site as well as internet presentations. He or she could work for both organisations, and in my opinion it would be money well spent.

There must surely be other areas where you can cut down. We have heard about a few issues in this thread for example. I know it's hard for you to see the wisdom of this (many have tried many times already), but there is no law against keep trying.

Roland

A trained coordinator that's member of the staff is a very good idea. Especially when it comes to the bigger events with the many concurrent broadcasts. Take, for example, next year in Shanghai - how will you be able Roland to coordinate the broadcasts from Denmark?

[hrothgar]

geller, on Jul 23 2006, 04:49 PM, said:

I think this is very important.  If VuGraph is regarded as an integral part of the requirements, high speed internet access can be included as one of the requirements to be met by the hotel in their bid.  In other words, no high speed net access means you won't use their hotel.  If that's done from the onset, the hotel will be reasonable.  Whereas once you sign the basic contract they can gouge you to their heart's content.    I wish all tourney organizers would keep this in mind.

This is the most important comment that I've seen in this thread...

The single most useful contribution that the official tournament sponsors could make to the Vugraph proceedings is ensuring that broadband connectivity is included as part of the site selection process.

[Walddk]

fskoul, on Jul 23 2006, 04:15 PM, said:

Walddk, on Jul 23 2006, 09:03 AM, said:

Dear WBF and EBL,

Employ a full-time vugraph coordinator, for on site as well as internet presentations. He or she could work for both organisations, and in my opinion it would be money well spent.

There must surely be other areas where you can cut down. We have heard about a few issues in this thread for example. I know it's hard for you to see the wisdom of this (many have tried many times already), but there is no law against keep trying.

Roland

A trained coordinator that's member of the staff is a very good idea. Especially when it comes to the bigger events with the many concurrent broadcasts. Take, for example, next year in Shanghai - how will you be able Roland to coordinate the broadcasts from Denmark?

It depends on what the WBF can offer me. If nothing, I will obviously stay loyal to BBO, as I have done for 5 years now.

With this said, I can't coordinate the on site part from home, and that's an important part. I think that one person should do both. This would mean that I must be at the venue, but I promise that I will be happy with a 3*** or 4**** hotel.

I do BBO for free because Fred is my friend and because BBO is a free internet site. I will not do unpaid work for the WBF and/or EBL.

Roland

[hrothgar]

>>A trained coordinator that's member of the staff is a very good idea. Especially
>>when it comes to the bigger events with the many concurrent broadcasts.
>>Take, for example, next year in Shanghai - how will you be able Roland to
>>coordinate the broadcasts from Denmark?

>It depends on what the WBF can offer me. If nothing, I will obviously stay
>loyal to BBO, as I have done for 5 years now.

(I really hope that this posting was a very poorly timed attempt at humor)

Any system that requires flying people across the world to supervise an internet connection is insane.
I hate to break it to you guys, but none of this is rocket science.

As I noted before, robust systems are based on developing process. We need a standardized system that any local tournament sponsor can use to get a Vugraph up and running smoothly and efficiently.

If the system requires permanent full time employees (either on BBO's end or the WBF's) then the system is broken at a very fundament level. If the system has a centralized point of failure, than the system needs to be redesigned.