[Deptheads] Pre-Reg Pending

Wed Jun 24 13:54:33 PDT 2020

The result is, the pending feature will remain the same until further notice.
Waitlisted people will not be automatically moved to the approved list if someone drops or is dropped from the event.
This is actually a great time to decide this, since I’m about to write the new drop code.

———

I think I might try to setup something that is event type or host specific at some point, because some event types need or hosts want more control over who gets approved. This will not be promised for Gateway.

The implementation of the event type or host specific auto-approval will come with a caveat. If I implement it, all events will have to have finite capacities. I keep pointing out that a) we have finite space. b) GMs should know how many rounds they are doing, and therefore know the max players they can handle in an event. The unlimited setting is misleading as in most cases it is limited by the number of games present.

I’m pretty sure Board and Card Games would be thrilled for auto-approve everything, provided they can figure out capacities.

Party Games and RPGs need the pending layer. LARPs probably too. LARPs can be either GM or room(s) capacity.

Collectible Card and Minis, Miniatures, and Video are pretty indifferent on the pending. War Games probably doesn’t care either. And general events probably don’t need it either. Most of these events list capacities already.

Something to think about, but probably won’t be implemented for Gateway.

Tanya

> On Jun 24, 2020, at 8:55 AM, Strategicon Department Heads <deptheads at strategicon.net> wrote:
> 
> Message From: Victor Bugg  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> 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
> https://strategicon.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/deptheads

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://strategicon.net/archives/deptheads/attachments/20200624/7b52e81d/attachment-0001.html>