[jkdood]

If Roland has more volunteers like you and the luxury of picking from several options and players, it's always nice to have someone so adept and able

[HedyG]

i always leave the chat on when commentating, but at times it can be difficult to try to keep up with the private messages ( comments and/or questions). on the other hand it is rude not to reply.
not everybody can multitask!
also by switching it off you might avoid the rude remarks that sometimes come.
example: player opens 1NT, he has 15 HCPs. i get his CC (did anybody open it when i sent the link to table?) and look up their 1NT opening. then i write to table 15-17 NT and get following comment from a spectator: "we can count to 15, don't need you to tell us. in other words you talk too much!"
well, it's great that he can count to 15 but did he know whether they played 13-15, 14-16 or 15-17 NT?
so sometimes i wish i didn't have the chat on.............

[TimG]

HedyG, on Aug 22 2008, 10:09 AM, said:

also by switching it off you might avoid the rude remarks that sometimes come.

Such a comment would find the perpetrator on my enemy list (and enemy chat is ignored). Though I understand it is frustrating to receive the message in the first place.

I don't think it is rude not to reply. I sometimes send a comment that I expect a commentator to consider, but do not expect a reply. And, if the commentator is overwhelmed with private messages, I understand that he might not have time to even consider my comment, let alone reply.

[jkdood]

Ditto! The enemy list to get annoying or offensive chat from another member ONCE and then NEVER again is one of BBO's finest options

[Walddk]

Regularly, I send the following message to the room:

Please understand that the commentators may not have time to respond to private chat messages. No offence intended. Useful info appreciated, though.

I even have some of it in my profile. Very few take offence if they don't get a reply.

Roland

[pclayton]

Walddk, on Aug 22 2008, 08:33 AM, said:

Regularly, I send the following message to the room:

Please understand that the commentators may not have time to respond to private chat messages. No offence intended. Useful info appreciated, though.

I even have some of it in my profile. Very few take offence if they don't get a reply.

Roland

Maybe because they can't tell you they are offended, since you don't have the "+++" on?

(Just Kidding Roland )

[Walddk]

pclayton, on Aug 22 2008, 06:46 PM, said:

Walddk, on Aug 22 2008, 08:33 AM, said:

Regularly, I send the following message to the room:

Please understand that the commentators may not have time to respond to private chat messages. No offence intended. Useful info appreciated, though.

I even have some of it in my profile. Very few take offence if they don't get a reply.

Roland

Maybe because they can't tell you they are offended, since you don't have the "+++" on?

(Just Kidding Roland )

Funny that you bring that forward, Phil (I know you are kidding). I am one of the few who can't avoid private chat messages whether I have +++ in my profile or not. Yellows must "listen" to everything. That's why I can't be bothered to insert those three pluses.

I and other yellows can of course be invisible (also in the rooms), but as soon as I type something, everyone will be able to click on my username and send a message. Walddk2 is always visible, Walddk1 plus Walddk3-14 are always invisible.

That's how I prefer it, and it seems to work well.

Roland

[cherdano]

Bah. There is this big fuzz about a possible "invisibility cloak", and Roland already can choose to have both a visible and some invisible clones of himself at the same time!

[Walddk]

cherdano, on Aug 22 2008, 07:06 PM, said:

Bah. There is this big fuzz about a possible "invisibility cloak", and Roland already can choose to have both a visible and some invisible clones of himself at the same time!

It's new to me if there is fuzz connected to this. I am not sure if your post should be interpreted as criticism or mere facts. If I were to have all "clones" visible, it is as certain as amen in the church that I won't be able to see more than a fraction of the private messages I would get.

Believe me, I get loads as it is with only one account visible.

Roland

[cherdano]

This is the fuzz I am talking about:
http://www.cnn.com/2008/TECH/07/01/invisib...loak/index.html

The scientists think they are ahead, but in reality they are so far behind what Roland can do already, today!

[the saint]

TimG, on Aug 22 2008, 03:37 PM, said:

HedyG, on Aug 22 2008, 10:09 AM, said:

also by switching it off you might avoid the rude remarks that sometimes come.

Such a comment would find the perpetrator on my enemy list (and enemy chat is ignored). Though I understand it is frustrating to receive the message in the first place.

I don't think it is rude not to reply. I sometimes send a comment that I expect a commentator to consider, but do not expect a reply. And, if the commentator is overwhelmed with private messages, I understand that he might not have time to even consider my comment, let alone reply.

I have made some very good friends by replying to comments and questions!