[Deptheads] Pre-Reg Pending

Wed Jun 24 12:23:11 PDT 2020

> On Jun 24, 2020, at 12:18 PM, Strategicon Department Heads <deptheads at strategicon.net> wrote:
> 
> Message From: Brandon Weiss  rogue2125 at gmail.com
> I've never had a problem with a player sufficient to require me to not approve them but can see where the problems could occur (especially in Party Games, LARPs, and RPGs).
> 
> Is there a way to flag an account as a "Problem Child" that would then require approval but leave all otherwise unflagged accounts as auto-approved? I don't know how much of a headache that could cause on the backend.

There is, but not without potential legal repercussions.

Eric

> 
> Brandon
> 
> On Wed, Jun 24, 2020 at 11:13 AM Strategicon Department Heads <deptheads at strategicon.net <mailto:deptheads at strategicon.net>> wrote:
> Message From: Tanya Aldrich  taldrich at strategicon.net <mailto:taldrich at strategicon.net>
> 1. Yes
> 
> 2. No. I leave this to Eric A. to consider.
> 
> 3. Assuming supervisor is someone with admin access, I believe Robert has implemented this. Not ported to live site yet.
> 
> Tanya
> 
>> On Jun 24, 2020, at 10:37 AM, Strategicon Department Heads <deptheads at strategicon.net <mailto:deptheads at strategicon.net>> wrote:
>> 
>> Message From: Mike James  minis.tyrant at gmail.com <mailto:minis.tyrant at gmail.com>
>> Couple of questions and clarifications so everyone is on the same page. 
>> 
>> 1. Do players still have the ability to un-preregister?
>> 
>> 2. Can the department head see the contact email of registrant?
>> 
>> 3. Is there a way for the supervisor to contact all the attendees in one message?
>> 
>> Personally, Miniatures has no problem with auto-approving all pre-regs, but that’s not a huge thing in my department. 
>> 
>> Mike
>> 
>> On Wed, Jun 24, 2020 at 10:19 AM Strategicon Department Heads <deptheads at strategicon.net <mailto:deptheads at strategicon.net>> wrote:
>> Message From: Jason DuVall  nekojin at gmail.com <mailto:nekojin at gmail.com>
>> I agree with this - approving someone, then yanking their approval, is worse, PR-wise, than them having to wait to be approved with the knowledge that they might be rejected. It's a problem that comes up so rarely, that we forget it's a problem... but somewhere around 2% of everyone is completely irrational, and will cause problems where you didn't even realize that problems could exist. 
>> 
>> It's not so much of a problem in my department, but in RPGs especially, the GMs should have final approval on players before anyone gets approved.  
>> 
>> On Wed, Jun 24, 2020 at 8:55 AM Strategicon Department Heads <deptheads at strategicon.net <mailto:deptheads at strategicon.net>> wrote:
>> Message From: Victor Bugg  fhoenix88 at yahoo.com <mailto:fhoenix88 at yahoo.com>
>> I have always wanted "auto approval" and dept. supervisors going back in manually to clean up any potential conflict since 90% of time approval is auto and less than 10% require Supervisor to step in or have a  GM notify a supervisor of a potential player conflict. That said.........it is more a pr nightmare to remove an auto-approved player than vetting everyone and every event to begin with......even if 90% of time it doesn't matter. So that is why I never pushed or brought it up again the past years. Leave it up to those on both sides of approval and deny and what works best for majority.
>> 
>> 
>> Victor 
>> On Wednesday, June 24, 2020, 12:06:05 AM MST, Strategicon Department Heads <deptheads at strategicon.net <mailto:deptheads at strategicon.net>> wrote:
>> 
>> 
>> I think the pending step should be kept. I've had GMs notify me about problem players before who they would prefer be kept out of their games, and those specific players would then show up in the pre-reg approval queues. Essentially, I know it's a bit of a pain, but I think it's a bit of a security risk if people are just automatically approved wholesale.
>> 
>> --Will
>> 
>> On Tue, Jun 23, 2020, 6:56 PM Strategicon Department Heads <deptheads at strategicon.net <mailto:deptheads at strategicon.net>> wrote:
>> Message From: Tanya Aldrich  taldrich at strategicon.net <mailto:taldrich at strategicon.net>
>> Hi All,
>> 
>> With the addition of the waitlist feature, I’m wondering if we really need to keep the Pending step for limited capacity events.
>> 
>> I need to know, if anyone has an issue with auto approval for all events.
>> 
>> Admins will still have the ability to add and drop people from an event, and soon bump someone back to waitlist.
>> 
>> Currently the code allows a capacity which is a max of 50% pre-reg (100% for virtual) and a waitlist (virtual and 100%) for pre-reg users.
>> 
>> I’ve included the waitlist feature in the new code for both physical and virtual events (a waitlist is not required, it is purely an available option for all). The new setup would be 50% of max capacity plus 50% of waitlist capacity for pre-reg of on-site events. 100% for both for virtual (I wonder why).
>> 
>> If we get rid of the pending step, if someone drops from an event, the next person on the waitlist will be approved (if the event permits).
>> 
>> I say, "if event permits", because the department head can manually approve above 50%. For example, a couple where only one got auto approved and the other waitlisted. A drop from this event would not automatically move someone up from the waitlist.
>> 
>> Manual approval should never fill an on-site event to capacity.
>> 
>> So, does anyone *need* the pending step to remain?
>> 
>> If I haven’t heard a request to keep it by Monday morning, I will assume Pending is no long needed in the new format.
>> 
>> Tanya
>> _______________________________________________
>> Deptheads mailing list
>> Deptheads at strategicon.net <mailto:Deptheads at strategicon.net>
>> https://strategicon.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/deptheads <https://strategicon.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/deptheads>
>> Message From: William Hillstrom  urbanjediwill at gmail.com <mailto:urbanjediwill at gmail.com>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Deptheads mailing list
>> Deptheads at strategicon.net <mailto:Deptheads at strategicon.net>
>> https://strategicon.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/deptheads <https://strategicon.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/deptheads>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Deptheads mailing list
>> Deptheads at strategicon.net <mailto:Deptheads at strategicon.net>
>> https://strategicon.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/deptheads <https://strategicon.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/deptheads>
>> 
>> 
>> -- 
>> "Would you like another drink, sir?" asked the bartender.
>> "I think not," replied Descartes, and promptly vanished.
>> _______________________________________________
>> Deptheads mailing list
>> Deptheads at strategicon.net <mailto:Deptheads at strategicon.net>
>> https://strategicon.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/deptheads <https://strategicon.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/deptheads>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Deptheads mailing list
>> Deptheads at strategicon.net <mailto:Deptheads at strategicon.net>
>> https://strategicon.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/deptheads <https://strategicon.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/deptheads>
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Deptheads mailing list
> Deptheads at strategicon.net <mailto:Deptheads at strategicon.net>
> https://strategicon.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/deptheads <https://strategicon.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/deptheads>
> _______________________________________________
> Deptheads mailing list
> Deptheads at strategicon.net
> https://strategicon.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/deptheads

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://strategicon.net/archives/deptheads/attachments/20200624/a571d298/attachment-0001.html>