Entering challenges

[edog743]

Nothing is more frustrating than entering challenges and seeing the same names time after that have entered multiple challenges and they are not playing them. Whats worse is when there is a contest going and they are playing the contest while all thier challenges are left not played. is it just me or have other people observed this.

[Webman]

It might be good (and I think you or someone else have suggested this) if you can't enter a new challenge until your other challenges are complete. The exceptions would be:1) Challenges you created yourself2) Personal (1 on 1) challengesI'd be curious if anyone would be opposed to this, and reasons why.Feedback appreciated.

[edog743]

It was me I cannot see how anyone could be opposed

[OKathyO]

Maybe I'm missing something here........but........If you don't play the challenge in the alloted time, you forfeit the challange? 
 For example, there's a challange set up for 10 ppl to play Ultimate X Poker......Start Date 8/01 End Date 8/03....If 10 people enter and only 9 ppl play, regardless the challenge ends at 12:00 midnight on 8/03 correct?  So if that 1 person didn't play, but signed up, that means the winner would only get 9 points vs 10. 
 
What's the big deal if they sign up?  Most of these players (I being one of them) have every intention to play those games....since these challanges started I "accidently" didn't play one and it was forfeited.  I truly don't think ppl are maciously signing up for challanges only not to play them.......

[edog743]

Not the point Kathy why do feel the need to enter so many challenges at one time. preventing others from entering them.It is so simple enter it,play it, enter another etc. etc. Besides greed is a terrible thing.

[marie meijer]

I am surprised this topic arose, "not that there is anything wrong with it" and chose to present my side of this issue. I noticed others signing up for several challenges at a time so I began doing likewise. It made sense to me. Of all the games offered for group challenges, there are only a handful that I prefer consistently to play. Usually these are in line with what I would most likely play in a casino. I usually arise at 6:00 and am out the door to swim by 6:30. It saves me time to check off a few challenges at once and play them as my schedule allows, during the day. The convenience is scanning that list of challenges only once a day. Members are creating challenges all day long and there are dozens offered every time I check. Create your own challenges if you feel that looong list is running low. I also enjoy friendly competition with a few members, we prefer like games and we tend to play each others challenges. I also prefer to play X amount of hands in given challenges. SO with these priorities/limitations, I check what I wish to play when I see them available. If I open a challenge and note some lucky addict already has hit 80K, I still play that challenge. I like the game, the challenger or the number of hands it offers. It still affords me the opportunity to enhance my game. The attention given this topic will likely encourage others to sign up for several challenges at the same time.

[marie meijer]

It's 10:00 PM here and there are 58 challenges to enter. This seems about typical at any given time. I do not see greed as an appropriate word to describe an individual's game selection preference. However, if enough stand up to be counted perhaps a daily limit on challenges can be instigated. We are limited to 8 sessions a day for this contest and I do not see any protests. IN fact some of us are applauding as it enables those of us with minimum will power to accomplish other stuff during the day! I doubt if an honor system for only playing 8 contest sessions would work. It has to be mandatory and enforced for everyone. The number of challenges played a day would probably have to be enforced as well.

[edog743]

Marie, say you were at your favorite casino and there was a bank of V.P. machines with one seat open. You approach the machine and a person says I am playing that in addition to the machine they are sitting in front of.  I am sure you would not be happy, it is basically the same thing. Yes greed is a terrible thing.

[OKathyO]

Greed is an excessive desire to possess wealth or goods with the intention to keep it for one's self. Greed - like lust and gluttony - is a sin of excess. Greed is inappropriate expectation. However, greed is applied to a very excessive or rapacious desire and pursuit of wealth, status, and power.............I think the term you're applying to us is a little strong............We're all entitled to our opinion's and edog, i'm putting this one down as "let's agree to disagree".  

[edog743]

Thank you Kathy for the definition I think you proved that greed is exactly the right word. although gluttony fits nicely also.