[Vampyr]

Hi. Anyone who is running team matches, eg the EBU Lockdown League, London Business Houses etc needs to be aware that the host of the meeting can chat privately with his partner. Organisations should probably search for another platform, or at the very least not hand out master points or NGS ratings for these games.

The host can also chat with teammates.

[diana_eva]

Vampyr, on 2020-May-18, 11:08, said:

Hi. Anyone who is running team matches, eg the EBU Lockdown League, London Business Houses etc needs to be aware that the host of the meeting can chat privately with his partner. Organisations should probably search for another platform, or at the very least not hand out master points or NGS ratings for these games.

The host can also chat with teammates.

Or they could have someone who is not playing create the team matches. Like a TD for example.

[jandrew]

Vampyr, on 2020-May-18, 11:08, said:

Hi. Anyone who is running team matches, eg the EBU Lockdown League, London Business Houses etc needs to be aware that the host of the meeting can chat privately with his partner. Organisations should probably search for another platform, or at the very least not hand out master points or NGS ratings for these games.

The host can also chat with teammates.

This is, I think, rather behind the times.
When I first started creating teams matches over 8 years ago it was common knowledge that the host could chat (both ways) to all the players.
Usually the host was not a player - else he would have had difficulties moving from table to table to sort out problems, disconnections, etc.
It was certainly the case that the host could not do his job properly without having full access.

[Vampyr]

diana_eva, on 2020-May-18, 11:30, said:

Or they could have someone who is not playing create the team matches. Like a TD for example.

The EBU lockdown league and the London business house as league do not have tournament directors. If we need a ruling, we ask for it afterwards. I am sure that other leagues and the like do not have extra people who can be the host for matches. I appreciate what you said in the other thread about the matches being intended as a fun feature, but people are playing their normal matches online as they have no choice.

So it is pretty important that the ability for hosts to chat, or be chatted to, privately with their partner or teammates be removed.

[hrothgar]

Vampyr, on 2020-May-18, 14:41, said:

So it is pretty important that the ability for hosts to chat, or be chatted to, privately with their partner or teammates be removed.

No, its not

If someone wants to cheat by using a side channel to communicate with their partner / team mate there's no reason that they need to use this BBO feature

They can simply use their cell phone or any one of a variety of different messaging apps.

Removing this functionality deprives some people with useful functionality while doing absolutely nothing to improve security.

Doing so would be just another example of security theater.

[paulg]

Vampyr, on 2020-May-18, 14:41, said:

The EBU lockdown league and the London business house as league do not have tournament directors. If we need a ruling, we ask for it afterwards. I am sure that other leagues and the like do not have extra people who can be the host for matches. I appreciate what you said in the other thread about the matches being intended as a fun feature, but people are playing their normal matches online as they have no choice.

So it is pretty important that the ability for hosts to chat, or be chatted to, privately with their partner or teammates be removed.

Leagues have chosen to use the free BBO platform to run these events and this is a well-known feature of how BBO has always worked. I think you should make your demands on the league organisers, perhaps to charge so that directors can be provided, rather than BBO.

For the vast majority of BBO users it is not important.

[RMB1]

hrothgar, on 2020-May-18, 15:11, said:

They can simply use their cell phone or any one of a variety of different messaging apps.

Matches in my local league invariably involve at least one pair where both players are in the same household. So electronic communications is not necessary - shouting will do.

[barmar]

RMB1, on 2020-May-18, 15:23, said:

Matches in my local league invariably involve at least one pair where both players are in the same household. So electronic communications is not necessary - shouting will do.

This is also quite common in pair tournaments. I know a number of husband/wife pairs.

As Richard says, it's futile to try to legislate against communication in this environment. We don't have to facilitate it, so we don't normally allow private chat between partners until the last board of the round is over. But the tourney host and TD are considered special and get extra privileges, which include private chat with any player in the tourney, even their partner. We decided that the host/TD privileges trump player restrictions.

They're expected to be responsible and not abuse it. It's similar to being a playing director in a f2f club.

[Vampyr]

barmar, on 2020-May-18, 16:32, said:

This is also quite common in pair tournaments. I know a number of husband/wife pairs.

As Richard says, it's futile to try to legislate against communication in this environment. We don't have to facilitate it, so we don't normally allow private chat between partners until the last board of the round is over. But the tourney host and TD are considered special and get extra privileges, which include private chat with any player in the tourney, even their partner. We decided that the host/TD privileges trump player restrictions.

They're expected to be responsible and not abuse it. It's similar to being a playing director in a f2f club.

Well, no, it’s not. A playing director doesn’t communicate privately with partner. Of course it’s true that people can easily find other ways to cheat. But that requires prior setup, And people may feel wrong doing that but not wrong to make the odd comment online. It just makes private communication much easier. Yes of course you can set up a zoom meeting with your teammates, But it’s much simpler just to say don’t bid a slam on board six. I haven’t seen, in any of the team matches I’ve played, any possible reason that the host would need to chat privately to his partner or teammates.

Probably best to make it an option, since some people seem to think there is a valid reason for private chat.

[pescetom]

Vampyr, on 2020-May-18, 20:51, said:

I haven’t seen, in any of the team matches I’ve played, any possible reason that the host would need to chat privately to his partner or teammates.

I agree with this, although I don't think it is a big issue.

But if (as I seem to remember) BBO decided that a playing director cannot see other players cards when called then it seems logical they should also disable private chat between a host and his own partner.

Of course it doesn't make sense to make life really difficult for a playing host because that just pushes him to host and play with two different nicknames and devices, which is clearly less transparent and controllable.

[barmar]

Vampyr, on 2020-May-18, 20:51, said:

Well, no, it’s not. A playing director doesn’t communicate privately with partner.

That's what I meant by "be responsible and not abuse it" -- a playing directory doesn't communicate privately with partner, and a tourney host shouldn't do so either, even though they have the ability.

[Vampyr]

barmar, on 2020-May-19, 16:27, said:

That's what I meant by "be responsible and not abuse it" -- a playing directory doesn't communicate privately with partner, and a tourney host shouldn't do so either, even though they have the ability.

OK, but why does it have to be private? What would a team game host wish to discuss with one of the participants that cannot be shared with the rest of the table?

[diana_eva]

Vampyr, on 2020-May-22, 20:27, said:

OK, but why does it have to be private? What would a team game host wish to discuss with one of the participants that cannot be shared with the rest of the table?

It is probably time to drop this, Stephanie. It so happens that if people can private chat they don't immediately engage in abhorrent behaviour because of it. They can do this, in case they need to. If they don't need to, they won't.

[Vampyr]

diana_eva, on 2020-May-23, 01:09, said:

It is probably time to drop this, Stephanie. It so happens that if people can private chat they don't immediately engage in abhorrent behaviour because of it. They can do this, in case they need to. If they don't need to, they won't.

Can you at least make it optional? I know that people can talk on the phone, on zoom, whatever, but that requires malice aforethought. Opportunistic cheating is much easier, and for some, more palatable,

[barmar]

Vampyr, on 2020-May-22, 20:27, said:

OK, but why does it have to be private? What would a team game host wish to discuss with one of the participants that cannot be shared with the rest of the table?

How about accusing another player of cheating?