Originally posted by GK:
...here's some honest SNAKEmusings ;
1) the site is NOT as bad as is being documented here (and you KNOW that I don't kow-tow nor kiss a$$ here )...
2) are there problems - yes, ESPECIALLY if you choose the WRONG player which is a MAJOR one obviously!...also, as has been documented here, the font is TOO small and that STOOPID ad has to disappear so that it's easier to track the draft in it's entirety...
3) KJDuke and others, PLEASE stop going BACK in time with posts that state why didn't we test this sooner, why are we just now "guinea pigs", etc., etc., etc... THE PAST IS THE PAST - LET IT GO - EVEN IF IT WAS A MISTAKE, AS IT'S NOW DONE...LET'S SIMPLY MOVE FORWARD NOW AND WORK TOGETHER TO SEE HOW WE CAN MAKE CORRECTIONS ASAP AND CHANGE THIS SITE FOR THE BETTER!...please as many here as possible sign up for the NFFC Style 14 team 3RR Draft that starts at 12:30 PM EST and let's start making progress instead of complaining here...see you all in that draft room...thanks much...GK the major issue is here is we waited and waited...and 90% of the problems are obvious and cant miss the first 30 seconds in the draft room.
Painful---Here comes the feedback...
-
Tom Kessenich
- Posts: 30097
- Joined: Tue Apr 06, 2004 6:00 pm
Painful---Here comes the feedback...
Originally posted by RedRyder:
quote:Originally posted by Tom Kessenich:
quote:Originally posted by RedRyder:
I know of at least one person who told me yesterday they were asked not to be critical of the NFFC Jules, this is not correct. For the record, I contacted Glenn Schroter to ask him to post some thoughts if he believed there were positive thoughts to be posted because I believed the conversation had steered away from being positive in terms of helping us to better the site and had become a forum to lash out at us and Fanball. I made it quite clear to Glenn that I did not want him to post anything he did not believe. As an influential member of our event, I believed that if Glenn had positive things to say those thoughts would be heard. If he didn't (and by all accounts he's unhappy as you are) then that's the way it goes.
But AT NO TIME was Glenn asked to post anything about the draft site that he did not believe. or was he asked not to be critical. I NEVER said that and no one should believe or infer that was the case. And obviously, no one in the $125 league had any idea I even talked to Glenn so the idea that they would somehow be reluctant to issue negative commentary is once again insulting to them.
I thought I would clear the air on that to avoid any further confusion. Take me to task for talking to Glenn if you will. [/QUOTE]TK, are you serious? If someone had mentioned me in a post, but DID NOT use my name, and then you came on and used my name, I would be pretty unhappy. I do not think that is fair.
Greg's phone call did a world of good and that is all erased by your post.
I can't speak for Glenn as to a conversation you and he may or may not have had. And at no time was your name mentioned.
The sentence I posted above is pretty clear. It didn't say someone was asked to post something they didn't believe.
So, now we all know you talked to Glenn (we did not know that last night)...nice. [/QUOTE]Jules, the problem with your post was that it carried significant inaccuracies and misconceptions about what transpired. Take me task for identifying who I spoke with if you will and if Glenn has a problem with this he knows how to contact me.
I wanted to make it very clear about what was said so no one here or anywhere else could present an inaccurate statement as being fact. Forgive me if I've grown a bit weary of seeing that considering how often it's happened in the past several months. Once again, at no time was anyone ever asked to not be critical of the NFFC. To even make that implication is far more damaging in my opinion than me identifying who I spoke with.
quote:Originally posted by Tom Kessenich:
quote:Originally posted by RedRyder:
I know of at least one person who told me yesterday they were asked not to be critical of the NFFC Jules, this is not correct. For the record, I contacted Glenn Schroter to ask him to post some thoughts if he believed there were positive thoughts to be posted because I believed the conversation had steered away from being positive in terms of helping us to better the site and had become a forum to lash out at us and Fanball. I made it quite clear to Glenn that I did not want him to post anything he did not believe. As an influential member of our event, I believed that if Glenn had positive things to say those thoughts would be heard. If he didn't (and by all accounts he's unhappy as you are) then that's the way it goes.
But AT NO TIME was Glenn asked to post anything about the draft site that he did not believe. or was he asked not to be critical. I NEVER said that and no one should believe or infer that was the case. And obviously, no one in the $125 league had any idea I even talked to Glenn so the idea that they would somehow be reluctant to issue negative commentary is once again insulting to them.
I thought I would clear the air on that to avoid any further confusion. Take me to task for talking to Glenn if you will. [/QUOTE]TK, are you serious? If someone had mentioned me in a post, but DID NOT use my name, and then you came on and used my name, I would be pretty unhappy. I do not think that is fair.
Greg's phone call did a world of good and that is all erased by your post.
I can't speak for Glenn as to a conversation you and he may or may not have had. And at no time was your name mentioned.
The sentence I posted above is pretty clear. It didn't say someone was asked to post something they didn't believe.
So, now we all know you talked to Glenn (we did not know that last night)...nice. [/QUOTE]Jules, the problem with your post was that it carried significant inaccuracies and misconceptions about what transpired. Take me task for identifying who I spoke with if you will and if Glenn has a problem with this he knows how to contact me.
I wanted to make it very clear about what was said so no one here or anywhere else could present an inaccurate statement as being fact. Forgive me if I've grown a bit weary of seeing that considering how often it's happened in the past several months. Once again, at no time was anyone ever asked to not be critical of the NFFC. To even make that implication is far more damaging in my opinion than me identifying who I spoke with.
Tom Kessenich
Manager of High Stakes Fantasy Games, SportsHub Technologies
Twitter - @TomKessenich
Manager of High Stakes Fantasy Games, SportsHub Technologies
Twitter - @TomKessenich
Painful---Here comes the feedback...
Originally posted by Greg Ambrosius:
quote:Originally posted by KJ Duke:
quote:Originally posted by Greg Ambrosius:
quote:Originally posted by GK:
...I'm mocking right now and so far none of the large problems mentioned here exist EXCEPT for the following obvious ones;
1) the font is way TOO small...
2) get rid of the ad(s)...
3) it's hard to track the draft given the present setup...
...let's all pick a 3RR 14 team mock time soon sometime this morning or afternoon here so we can work some of this out and have a continuous dialouge with Greg & TK included in the same mock here...anyone want to suggest a time today (soon?!)...GK TK and I are ready to jump in with you Glenn. Pick a time and a format and we'll do it and Chat with the other owners.
How about 12:30 ET, 14-team NFFC format?
So let's say we removed the ad and put the last 10 picks there. Then you wouldn't have to toggle back and forth unless you wanted to. The Draft Summary has some great, great features, but we still need 10 previous picks showing up somewhere else. That's what we're addressing first and foremost now.
12:30? [/QUOTE]10 picks... is this a 10-team draft Greg? 14 minimum. This was my main complaint with the old MDC, now you're hoping to get back to what they created in the year 1999? [/QUOTE]Let's see if we can do 14 there. Obviously it's all about real estate and how much room you have for everything. If we go 14, then the Chat gets reduced and that's where picks are being posted too, but you're right, it's all relevent to what's the most important info for the drafters at the time. John is working on a draft grid that along with this space will make all of this better. We improved the baseball software quickly and this can be improved too.
The ad space is where we're starting. [/QUOTE]is it possible to make the chat smaller? that would make the chat non existent.
quote:Originally posted by KJ Duke:
quote:Originally posted by Greg Ambrosius:
quote:Originally posted by GK:
...I'm mocking right now and so far none of the large problems mentioned here exist EXCEPT for the following obvious ones;
1) the font is way TOO small...
2) get rid of the ad(s)...
3) it's hard to track the draft given the present setup...
...let's all pick a 3RR 14 team mock time soon sometime this morning or afternoon here so we can work some of this out and have a continuous dialouge with Greg & TK included in the same mock here...anyone want to suggest a time today (soon?!)...GK TK and I are ready to jump in with you Glenn. Pick a time and a format and we'll do it and Chat with the other owners.
How about 12:30 ET, 14-team NFFC format?
So let's say we removed the ad and put the last 10 picks there. Then you wouldn't have to toggle back and forth unless you wanted to. The Draft Summary has some great, great features, but we still need 10 previous picks showing up somewhere else. That's what we're addressing first and foremost now.
12:30? [/QUOTE]10 picks... is this a 10-team draft Greg? 14 minimum. This was my main complaint with the old MDC, now you're hoping to get back to what they created in the year 1999? [/QUOTE]Let's see if we can do 14 there. Obviously it's all about real estate and how much room you have for everything. If we go 14, then the Chat gets reduced and that's where picks are being posted too, but you're right, it's all relevent to what's the most important info for the drafters at the time. John is working on a draft grid that along with this space will make all of this better. We improved the baseball software quickly and this can be improved too.
The ad space is where we're starting. [/QUOTE]is it possible to make the chat smaller? that would make the chat non existent.
-
King of Queens
- Posts: 5262
- Joined: Sat Aug 21, 2004 6:00 pm
Painful---Here comes the feedback...
Originally posted by Tom Kessenich:
quote:Originally posted by RedRyder:
I know of at least one person who told me yesterday they were asked not to be critical of the NFFC Jules, this is not correct. For the record, I contacted Glenn Schroter to ask him to post some thoughts if he believed there were positive thoughts to be posted because I believed the conversation had steered away from being positive in terms of helping us to better the site and had become a forum to lash out at us and Fanball. I made it quite clear to Glenn that I did not want him to post anything he did not believe. As an influential member of our event, I believed that if Glenn had positive things to say those thoughts would be heard. If he didn't (and by all accounts he's unhappy as you are) then that's the way it goes.
But AT NO TIME was Glenn asked to post anything about the draft site that he did not believe. or was he asked not to be critical. I NEVER said that and no one should believe or infer that was the case. And obviously, no one in the $125 league had any idea I even talked to Glenn so the idea that they would somehow be reluctant to issue negative commentary is once again insulting to them.
I thought I would clear the air on that to avoid any further confusion. Take me to task for talking to Glenn if you will. [/QUOTE]Your e-mail:
Hey Glenn, I'm not asking you to say anything you don't believe but if you could post some "positive" things about the draft room I think that would help a lot. You're an influential member and hearing you say some good things could stem the tide of negativity that appears to be going on now.
My personal opinion is the site is solid. We could use some more bells and whistles but I've been doing these drafts a long time and didn't have any major issues. Greg and I would like the ad to be removed so we're on your side there but the font looks fine to me, it's easy to navigate, drafting is easy, sorting by stats is easy. There's plenty of good things.
Like I said, don't post something you don't believe and if you think the site sucks like KJ we'll agree to disagree. But I do think positive comments coming from you would help. Take it under advisement. Thanks.
Well, I took it under advisement. I think it's pretty clear that you wanted me to steer the conversation toward the positive, and away from the negative. After using the site, I honestly have nothing positive to say about the site. Sorry I won't be able to help you out here.
Also, as KJ already mentioned, I spent valuable time in Vegas discussing layout ideas with John the I.T. Guy. None of the recommendations from 5 months ago were utilized, so forgive me if I feel like my suggestions now are likely to fall on deaf ears. Sorry, not going to waste my time again.
Good job, Tom. Way to "clear the air."
quote:Originally posted by RedRyder:
I know of at least one person who told me yesterday they were asked not to be critical of the NFFC Jules, this is not correct. For the record, I contacted Glenn Schroter to ask him to post some thoughts if he believed there were positive thoughts to be posted because I believed the conversation had steered away from being positive in terms of helping us to better the site and had become a forum to lash out at us and Fanball. I made it quite clear to Glenn that I did not want him to post anything he did not believe. As an influential member of our event, I believed that if Glenn had positive things to say those thoughts would be heard. If he didn't (and by all accounts he's unhappy as you are) then that's the way it goes.
But AT NO TIME was Glenn asked to post anything about the draft site that he did not believe. or was he asked not to be critical. I NEVER said that and no one should believe or infer that was the case. And obviously, no one in the $125 league had any idea I even talked to Glenn so the idea that they would somehow be reluctant to issue negative commentary is once again insulting to them.
I thought I would clear the air on that to avoid any further confusion. Take me to task for talking to Glenn if you will. [/QUOTE]Your e-mail:
Hey Glenn, I'm not asking you to say anything you don't believe but if you could post some "positive" things about the draft room I think that would help a lot. You're an influential member and hearing you say some good things could stem the tide of negativity that appears to be going on now.
My personal opinion is the site is solid. We could use some more bells and whistles but I've been doing these drafts a long time and didn't have any major issues. Greg and I would like the ad to be removed so we're on your side there but the font looks fine to me, it's easy to navigate, drafting is easy, sorting by stats is easy. There's plenty of good things.
Like I said, don't post something you don't believe and if you think the site sucks like KJ we'll agree to disagree. But I do think positive comments coming from you would help. Take it under advisement. Thanks.
Well, I took it under advisement. I think it's pretty clear that you wanted me to steer the conversation toward the positive, and away from the negative. After using the site, I honestly have nothing positive to say about the site. Sorry I won't be able to help you out here.
Also, as KJ already mentioned, I spent valuable time in Vegas discussing layout ideas with John the I.T. Guy. None of the recommendations from 5 months ago were utilized, so forgive me if I feel like my suggestions now are likely to fall on deaf ears. Sorry, not going to waste my time again.
Good job, Tom. Way to "clear the air."
Painful---Here comes the feedback...
If the draft summary is visible (and doesn't need to be toggled to get to), what is the point of listing the players selected in the chat as well??? 
For the record, I have no problem with going back only 10 picks. 14 is ideal, but not a biggie IMO.
For the record, I have no problem with going back only 10 picks. 14 is ideal, but not a biggie IMO.
Painful---Here comes the feedback...
Originally posted by Tom Kessenich:
quote:Originally posted by RedRyder:
quote:Originally posted by Tom Kessenich:
quote:Originally posted by RedRyder:
I know of at least one person who told me yesterday they were asked not to be critical of the NFFC Jules, this is not correct. For the record, I contacted Glenn Schroter to ask him to post some thoughts if he believed there were positive thoughts to be posted because I believed the conversation had steered away from being positive in terms of helping us to better the site and had become a forum to lash out at us and Fanball. I made it quite clear to Glenn that I did not want him to post anything he did not believe. As an influential member of our event, I believed that if Glenn had positive things to say those thoughts would be heard. If he didn't (and by all accounts he's unhappy as you are) then that's the way it goes.
But AT NO TIME was Glenn asked to post anything about the draft site that he did not believe. or was he asked not to be critical. I NEVER said that and no one should believe or infer that was the case. And obviously, no one in the $125 league had any idea I even talked to Glenn so the idea that they would somehow be reluctant to issue negative commentary is once again insulting to them.
I thought I would clear the air on that to avoid any further confusion. Take me to task for talking to Glenn if you will. [/QUOTE]TK, are you serious? If someone had mentioned me in a post, but DID NOT use my name, and then you came on and used my name, I would be pretty unhappy. I do not think that is fair.
Greg's phone call did a world of good and that is all erased by your post.
I can't speak for Glenn as to a conversation you and he may or may not have had. And at no time was your name mentioned.
The sentence I posted above is pretty clear. It didn't say someone was asked to post something they didn't believe.
So, now we all know you talked to Glenn (we did not know that last night)...nice. [/QUOTE]Jules, the problem with your post was that it carried significant inaccuracies and misconceptions about what transpired. Take me task for identifying who I spoke with if you will and if Glenn has a problem with this he knows how to contact me.
I wanted to make it very clear about what was said so no one here or anywhere else could present an inaccurate statement as being fact. Forgive me if I've grown a bit weary of seeing that considering how often it's happened in the past several months. Once again, at no time was anyone ever asked to not be critical of the NFFC. To even make that implication is far more damaging in my opinion than me identifying who I spoke with. [/QUOTE]Oh, I get it now. It's perfectly clear, I'm the bad guy now.
Do you know how many times I've went to bat for you folks? In public and private? I mean, I even posted on your arch enemy's MB (the FFPC) and stuck up for you folks during the baseball debacle.
Or the countless times I've either posted on FFF's Facebook or mentioned on our podcast or responded to via our customers e-mails who I recommend in the high stakes world. It was YOU FOLKS EVERY SINGLE FREAKIN' TIME!!!!!!!
You wanna lump me in with all the folks that slam you guys. Shameful.
quote:Originally posted by RedRyder:
quote:Originally posted by Tom Kessenich:
quote:Originally posted by RedRyder:
I know of at least one person who told me yesterday they were asked not to be critical of the NFFC Jules, this is not correct. For the record, I contacted Glenn Schroter to ask him to post some thoughts if he believed there were positive thoughts to be posted because I believed the conversation had steered away from being positive in terms of helping us to better the site and had become a forum to lash out at us and Fanball. I made it quite clear to Glenn that I did not want him to post anything he did not believe. As an influential member of our event, I believed that if Glenn had positive things to say those thoughts would be heard. If he didn't (and by all accounts he's unhappy as you are) then that's the way it goes.
But AT NO TIME was Glenn asked to post anything about the draft site that he did not believe. or was he asked not to be critical. I NEVER said that and no one should believe or infer that was the case. And obviously, no one in the $125 league had any idea I even talked to Glenn so the idea that they would somehow be reluctant to issue negative commentary is once again insulting to them.
I thought I would clear the air on that to avoid any further confusion. Take me to task for talking to Glenn if you will. [/QUOTE]TK, are you serious? If someone had mentioned me in a post, but DID NOT use my name, and then you came on and used my name, I would be pretty unhappy. I do not think that is fair.
Greg's phone call did a world of good and that is all erased by your post.
I can't speak for Glenn as to a conversation you and he may or may not have had. And at no time was your name mentioned.
The sentence I posted above is pretty clear. It didn't say someone was asked to post something they didn't believe.
So, now we all know you talked to Glenn (we did not know that last night)...nice. [/QUOTE]Jules, the problem with your post was that it carried significant inaccuracies and misconceptions about what transpired. Take me task for identifying who I spoke with if you will and if Glenn has a problem with this he knows how to contact me.
I wanted to make it very clear about what was said so no one here or anywhere else could present an inaccurate statement as being fact. Forgive me if I've grown a bit weary of seeing that considering how often it's happened in the past several months. Once again, at no time was anyone ever asked to not be critical of the NFFC. To even make that implication is far more damaging in my opinion than me identifying who I spoke with. [/QUOTE]Oh, I get it now. It's perfectly clear, I'm the bad guy now.
Do you know how many times I've went to bat for you folks? In public and private? I mean, I even posted on your arch enemy's MB (the FFPC) and stuck up for you folks during the baseball debacle.
Or the countless times I've either posted on FFF's Facebook or mentioned on our podcast or responded to via our customers e-mails who I recommend in the high stakes world. It was YOU FOLKS EVERY SINGLE FREAKIN' TIME!!!!!!!
You wanna lump me in with all the folks that slam you guys. Shameful.
@RedRyder
-
Greg Ambrosius
- Posts: 36411
- Joined: Tue Apr 06, 2004 6:00 pm
Painful---Here comes the feedback...
Originally posted by Popcorn Maker:
quote: is it possible to make the chat smaller? that would make the chat non existent. [/QB][/QUOTE]Chris, not the size of the font for the Chat, the size of the box for the Chat.
I'm not sure we can get 12 point helvetica for the font size in the real estate we have for everything. Something has to move or go then. But we'll look at what we have now and see if anything can be done.
quote: is it possible to make the chat smaller? that would make the chat non existent. [/QB][/QUOTE]Chris, not the size of the font for the Chat, the size of the box for the Chat.
I'm not sure we can get 12 point helvetica for the font size in the real estate we have for everything. Something has to move or go then. But we'll look at what we have now and see if anything can be done.
Founder, National Fantasy Football Championship & National Fantasy Baseball Championship
Twitter: @GregAmbrosius
Twitter: @GregAmbrosius