OK I give up. Despite resetting my password at least three times, I
still can't get IRTC to remember who I am. I could rant and rave ....
instead I'll do what, I guess, a lot of others are doing. Bye, IRTC.

John
-- 
"Eppur si muove" - Galileo Galilei

Post a reply to this message

Doctor John <joh### [at] homecom> wrote:
> instead I'll do what, I guess, a lot of others are doing. Bye, IRTC.

  Instead of understanding that new websites present technical problems
and that that solving these problems may take time, especially when they
are run by people on their free time as a hobby, you decide to boycott
the whole thing because you can't wait for people to fix the problem.

  No, you are not being a jerk. You are being a sensible and rational
person. Yes.

-- 
                                                          - Warp

Post a reply to this message

Doctor John wrote:
> OK I give up. Despite resetting my password at least three times, I
> still can't get IRTC to remember who I am. I could rant and rave ....
> instead I'll do what, I guess, a lot of others are doing. Bye, IRTC.
> 
> John

Why not e-mail me to find out what the problem is?  The site is using 
completely new re-written software.  We can't find problems if they're 
not reported to us.

We've been having problems with the e-mail system which I now think 
we've resolved.  I realize that it was frustrating for people but this 
sort of problem only shows up when you get a while lot of people hitting 
the system at the same time.

John - send me an e-mail to irt### [at] irtcorg.  Give me the user name 
you are trying to use to login and tell me what happens when you try to 
login and what happens when you try to login.  It will help me track 
down the problem.

One other note, I would like to thank the visitors to the ITRC site for 
their patience. This is why we didn't run an official contest right off 
the bat.  We need to work the kinks out of the system.  We had to get 
the site put up live in order to find these problems.  As well, we are 
all volunteering our time to do this and time is always very extremely 
limited. Please be patient as we work through problems and try to let us 
know when you have problems.

Thanks
David Buck

Post a reply to this message

Warp <war### [at] tagpovrayorg> wrote:
> Doctor John <joh### [at] homecom> wrote:
> > instead I'll do what, I guess, a lot of others are doing. Bye, IRTC.
>
>   Instead of understanding that new websites present technical problems
> and that that solving these problems may take time, especially when they
> are run by people on their free time as a hobby, you decide to boycott
> the whole thing because you can't wait for people to fix the problem.

>   No, you are not being a jerk. You are being a sensible and rational
> person. Yes.

So, you accusing everyone of "boycotting", who is turning his back on the IRTC
due to some disappointment, is much better. Right. Sensible and rational, too.

I see two fundamental flaws in the re-starting of the IRTC:

(1) Failure to define the rules beforehand.

(2) Failure to do a sufficient amount of "friendly user" testing beforehand.

People get excited, shouting "hooray, the IRTC is back" - only to discover that
it is still in some kind of early beta stage. With the documentation not only
requiring yet to be written, but also still to be specified.

You're suprised some people show disappointment?

Post a reply to this message

clipka <nomail@nomail> wrote:
> You're suprised some people show disappointment?

  I'm surprised some people acting like dicks over a free service run
entirely by volunteers on their free time as a hobby. It's like they had
paid for the service and they are now demanding it to work without flaws.

-- 
                                                          - Warp

Post a reply to this message

clipka wrote:
> 
> So, you accusing everyone of "boycotting", who is turning his back on the IRTC
> due to some disappointment, is much better. Right. Sensible and rational, too.
> 
> I see two fundamental flaws in the re-starting of the IRTC:
> 
> (1) Failure to define the rules beforehand.
> 
> (2) Failure to do a sufficient amount of "friendly user" testing beforehand.
> 
> People get excited, shouting "hooray, the IRTC is back" - only to discover that
> it is still in some kind of early beta stage. With the documentation not only
> requiring yet to be written, but also still to be specified.
> 
> You're suprised some people show disappointment?
> 
> 

Thankyou for seeing my point. As you say, I was showing disappointment
not anger.
My real gripe was that official competitions are supposed to start in
July and the site is nowhere near ready. The image that this will convey
to the rest of the CGI community is not good.

BTW Warp, I'm aware that the whole POV community is run by volunteers
but I'm still entitled to be annoyed if I'm told something is fixed then
turns out not to be.

John
-- 
"Eppur si muove" - Galileo Galilei

Post a reply to this message