Member Sites  ::  JOIN  ::  Forum  ::  Info  ::  Next Ring  
WebRing Managers Community - Untitled document One of the original and largest Ring Manager rings, promoting individual WebRings since 1998

  Forums     Login   Signup



WebRing Managers Community

Manager: wrug
WebRing Managers WebRing presents the WebRing Managers Forum, a place for WebRing Managers to discuss ideas, ethics, tactics, etc. This Forum is for WebRing discussion only and is closely moderated.
 

Sponsored Links

PLEASE READ BELOW BEFORE PARTICIPATING
A Note on Pendings
  For those processing new submissions we'd like to offer these reminders/bit
read...

Forum Posts - Start a new discussion! Posts 1 - 8 of 8
All Threads |   All Posts   ]

AUCTION PROBLEM IN CALCULATING ACTIVITY POINTS - 12/17/2008
Hi:

NOTE: I'm NOT posting this to my account rep or to support. I am posting it here because I believe there is a major problem in how the auction is calculating our reserved activity points.
I've been watching people in the shout box claim that they are hundreds of points short. Until today, I thought it was a random problem. However, out of curiousity, I've added up my points bid for the remaining auctions I'm trying to win and discovered that I too am 1312 activity points short. This can't be happening to just a few of us.

At the conclusion of today's auctions, the system immediately deducted those points from my total points reserved.

Here are the remaining auctions for me. The last number is my points bid as of 5:51 p.m. Eastern Standard Time.

Landscape Gardening UK 12/21/2008 14:10:03 35
West Coast Equine Enthusiasts 12/20/2008 14:12:19 23
A Shark's Own Webring 12/20/2008 14:12:14 30
Racing Pigeon WebRing 12/20/2008 14:10:29 475
Canadian Horses 12/20/2008 14:10:17 45
Psychoeducational Site 12/19/2008 14:13:07 28
Michigan Horse Lovers 12/19/2008 14:12:24 45
Horse of a Different Color 12/19/2008 14:12:18 41
Invisible Pain 12/19/2008 14:11:44 35
Depressed Diarist 12/19/2008 14:11:35
Stop It! 12/19/2008 14:11:18 24
OceanWorld 12/19/2008 14:11:13 31
The ManicBusters 12/19/2008 14:09:48 24
Agriculture and Farming 12/18/2008 14:12:30 35
Equine Photography 12/18/2008 14:12:03 50
Bipolar Resource 12/18/2008 14:11:53 25
UK racing pigeons 12/18/2008 14:10:55 31
Fighting Depression Webring 12/18/2008 14:10:28 35
Roma Fancy Pigeon Lofts Fancy Pigeon 12/18/2008 14:09:56 50

My total points bid is 1086 points BID. It says my points RESERVED are: 2398

Obviously something is wrong in how the system is calculating our activity points. I'm guessing that every time we increase a bid while trying to win an auction, the system just adds up our latest bid without deducting our previous bids. IS THIS POSSIBLE?

I am requesting, on behalf of EVERYONE bidding on these auctions, that someone look into this problem and resolve it now.

I am not bidding on anything else until this problem is resolved.

Thank you for your help in advance. You'll be ending a lot of complaints by fixing it.

Diana Pederson
Webring id: dlpwriter




Replied - 12/17/2008
Diana, I don't think that the system is adding them up wrong, but I could be mistaken. I haven't been keeping real close track, but I have been keeping enough track to know they're not deducting each bid, but only the final one. I did run into one problem where I had inadvertently bid 100 points instead of clicking on "buy now" and it didn't give it to me. So my rep ended the auction early, but it SEEMED that for some reason it got deducted twice, and I DID get two notices that I had won the auction. I'll be looking into it further, but that's really only one problem out of the many auctions since they fixed the problem of not giving rings to people who had met the reserve price. In my opinion, however, many of the rings are overpriced, especially for those of us who are simply merging rings. If I see a ring that has only two sites, and they want 100 buy now points, and the reserve price is likely to be around 50 points, it's not worth it, even if it has a high uniqueness score. I think what often happens is that newcomers to the system set up a ring, maybe recruit a few sites, and they decide it's no longer interesting, so they abandon the ring. Given that these sites are new, it gives a high rating. And the price seems to be based on rating more than the number of members. On the other hand, I'd have to say that if a ring has only a half dozen members, it should be priced at 50, rather than 100. I think a lot of rings never get bid on for this reason. And it seems that the system raises the prices next time they cycle the rings, instead of lowering them. WebRing said it was going to combine rings. That apparently didn't happen, so we're trying to help out. Perhaps we should earn 25 or 50 points for a merger, since the merging is being done by reps, and they would avoid merging webrings that don't belong together. It would encourage people seeking to merge webrings, which would help. I have found so many very, very similar rings, and often, about half will be sites in common with another ring, and half will be unique. When I'm looking at a new applicant, I find having to look at a stack of rings a mile long to be a real pain, and I do look and see what they belong to.




Replied - 12/17/2008
Pat:

If the system is adding up points right, how do you account for my "points reserved" being double what my bids total. Surely this can't happen to just person's account.

That's why I posted here hoping that someone will take a look at things and figure why the points are so off for some of us.

I agree with you on the price of webrings. I've bought several just to merge. Even bought a couple to rename into a webring I want BECAUSE the system tells me I have a failing website and it won't let me create a new webring.




Replied - 12/17/2008
distinctly possible there is a problem with the totals for committed to auctions number. As Pat suggested we don't believe there is a problem with the deduction when one wins an auction. We will continue to work on resolving issues with the committed point number which, while annoying, is not quite as critical (and fairly easily retabulated - which we'll do as needed).




Replied - 12/17/2008
distinctly possible there is a problem with the totals for committed to auctions number. As Pat suggested we don't believe there is a problem with the deduction when one wins an auction. We will continue to work on resolving issues with the committed point number which, while annoying, is not quite as critical (and fairly easily retabulated - which we'll do as needed).




Replied - 12/17/2008
A problem at least has been found. dlpwriter you will note many, many auctions say "over: leading bid" which makes no sense of course. Something did/has prevented that from changing over to "lost". We'll figure that out for you and others and get those points removed from the total




Replied - 12/17/2008
I ran into that same problem when I tried to start a new webring. It said I had more than one ring that had fewer than four sites, and wouldn't let me proceed. Ordinarily, it might make sense to restrict it if a person has, say, three recently formed, although if the system checks, and you have done everything to a ring except acquiring members (including fixing up the ring and the graphics, setting the preferences, managing applications, keeping on top of failed sites, inviting people, and so forth, all of which is true in my case), then I don't see a reason why the system should hold it against you if people don't accept your invitations. I have invited at least one site to every one of the small rings I started. Sometimes I didn't do it through the system, and sometimes I did. But it's on record that I have done so. I do have a problem with making over an existing ring, especially if you have to change its character a bit. I adopted one ring, and I am changing its character a little bit. But not that much. It looked like it was somewhat similar to what I wanted anyway. So I think especially when we are adopting small rings, which we've had no time to do anything with, the system shouldn't hold their lack of members against us. I have since merged some of those rings, so they're not little anymore. But if I were setting things up, I'd look at the overall score of all the person's webrings. Does the person tend to maintain them all to 95 or above? That, to me, is more of a measure. I don't have any control over whether someone accepts my invitation or not. So that's how I come down on it.

In the final analysis, I think some of us old timers sometimes see a niche that hasn't been filled. That's why I start new rings. Some of them have grown, and some haven't. And in filling the niche, we increase the diversity of WebRing as a whole. To me, that's a good thing. I saw a number of rings with one point of view, and none with a dissenting view, so that's why I wanted to start one.




Replied - 12/17/2008
Thank you. Glad to know I was right! Easier to be patient now that you have figured out what the problem is.

I assume those points will show up in our account at some point but what happens if we need the points now to avoid using cash?



All Threads |   All Posts   ]





Contact Us | Copyright © 2001-2016 WebRing®, Inc. Terms of Service - Help - Privacy Policy