BBO Discussion Forums: Should we have to pay for bots? - BBO Discussion Forums

 

The "poll" is pointless

This isn't our business...
We don't get to decide whether or not we pay for things.

Silly little complaints like this one really don't do anyone any good

agree with richard, but i'll go a little further.. i think the question is unfair, since 'bots' is a misnomer... the zone has bots, bbo has gib... i've played with both and there's a world of difference between the two

Well you can hardly get worse than the bots at zone.

I might agree to pay for bots who would play faultless bridge, who would play my system. I hope the boot and ban rule doesn't apply to bots because when I sit at a table with 3 bots I boot all the time. For one, it's the only way to get an undo, then I have to run across the table to get the undo and need to boot one of the opps bots as well, and that's to undo bot partner's idiocy.

I think we should simply remove your rights to use gib, given your actions with them. Fortunately in 8 days or so you will not be using them.

And I find your question insulting... but who decides if "we" should pay for bots? Why the owners of the bots and the BBO software of course. What "we" have to decide is if "we" want to play with them. It looks like you want to play given the description of what you do when you do play with them. But the main point is, if you don;t think they are worth whatever it is Fred will charge to use them, then don't pay it....

EarlPurple, on Sep 23 2005, 02:56 AM, said:

Silly question:

Is there a commercial bridge application that does what you want?
I have Jack, which is proibably the best of the bunch.
Its far from flawless.

Admittedly, Jack does play my system, however, thats only because the developers were nice enough to code into the application... But even so, the point still stands.

You seem to have somewhat unrealistic expectations...

I think one of the best things about BBO is instead of having non bot users subsidise bot users, or non tourney players subsidising tourney players, or whatever, we all get to choose the features we want.

By subsidising, I mean, if BBO were to charge a hefty annual membership fee, the people who use the premium features less will be overcharged, and the others undercharged. This way you get to pick what you like.

Didn't get to read earlpurple's first post before its gone. Ah well.

Don't think there was one - just the poll

What is this poll? Should we "have to" pay? We never have to pay, you can either pay or not get the product. If you would like free bots, program your own. This is a truly incredible poll.

agree with some other posters that is not our decision. but i don't see why they think we should not express an opinion.

so, imho, bots on bbo should be free. if the owners decide to ask money for that, fine, i'll not use bots.

Quote

Probably for the better that we don't have a program like Chtonic yet

Vote for me in the next World Presidental elections and I promise you free GIBs, free public transit, free food, zero taxes and a zero hours workweek.

Well GIBs haven't reported me to abuse yet.
But maybe if I'm hosting the table I have the right to decide whether or not to allow undos.

And I've tried having GIB sitting only in opposition but when I switch seats the hands change so I have to put a bot in there at least for the start of the hand, and for the last trick so it doesn't show up as "passed out".

Fred was well aware of the situation of GIBs and he was very open about it. He realized that its success would be if people want to use them.

I guess maybe then maybe you should run a poll as to wether those of us who bought GIB should have paid for it, we should be glad that BBO is free

Well I have paid for Jack. Can't integrate it into BBO.

And those who have paid for GIB as standalone software won't get any discount on here.

I thought we might see GIB used expanded so we can partner GIB in tourneys, have them sit in as sub for disconnects etc.

How will paying for it work? A small fee for unlimited usage or pay-per-use? But I know how this works - you start with a small fee and eventually it just becomes a major business. Saw it happen on okbridge, where we first paid $50 for unlimited use then within a few years it was $200 if you wanted to play in tourneys.

I thought that perhaps GIB could have been introduced here in its limited form for free by Ginsberg with the hope that it would impress enough people to go out and buy the full product, thus in some ways being free advertising for him.

helene_t, on Sep 23 2005, 11:37 AM, said:

And I promise tail wind in the bicycle lanes!

Roland

Walddk, on Sep 23 2005, 11:50 AM, said:

Good. If you like cyclists so much then how about coming to London and build me a nice tunnel between Golders Green and the lower part of Hampstead Heath (near the Royal Free Hospital) to cut out that horribly steep hill.

Cycling uphill is good for your health as well as for mine. I know, I should do this more often.

EarlPurple, on Sep 23 2005, 07:43 AM, said:

Are you a psychic? I ask because a number of your statements. Take the one quoted above for instance. When Fred announced GIB he specifically said he was unsure how much they would cost to use, and he commented on the question of if you were a licensed GIB user if you would have to pay at all or if you might get a discount. I have not seen any further on this issue.

Quote

I wonder, since you "boot" GIBS all the time so you can have undos and the like (This also means you are doing this at imp and MP tables, as undo's are allowed at teaching tables...and this is pretty much a no-no) if you are really interested in having GIB as a tourney partner. Particularily since you said you might pay (I will say, use) GIB if.. ." (it) would play faultless bridge, who would play my system." Well it is not going too, so why the interest?

Quote

Unclear why you thought this. GIB took work by a number of people to integrate into the program And when it was announced, it was announced as a fee-based service, with the introductory trial period.

Quote

This is not settled, but I suspect it is reasonable to assume it will be small fee for a time-specific unlilmited service (say a month or a year).

Quote

Well, having shunned OKBRIDGE, I can't discuss their policy. As BBO has become profitable (I would be quite stunned if it wasn't profitable right now), Fred and Uday have kept their promises to keep some of the site issues free. They introduced pay tourneys, but they let almost anyone who wants to run a free tourney to do so. They even go out of their way to try to ensure that you have choices for free tourneys by allowing free ones to start whenever they want. They introduce robots that you can, at your own desire, decide to use or not for what presumably will be a nominal fee. It is my belief, supported by the history of the site, that the business model of BBO is to promote bridge, and to make profit off many small transactions. Now if you averaged playing in 1 ACBL tourney a day, that would be $365 a year. With that view, maybe the $200 a year at OKBRIDGE was not a bad deal. But if you went to your local club and played an average of 1 ACBL event that would run you somewhere around five times that amount. I average maybe 2 ACBL (or other pay events) per month...yet I play nearly everyday. That is the advantage of BBO... you get to decide. Vote with your dollars.... don't want ot pay to use GIB? Then don't.

I agree, BBO has all the free options plus more than it had when I first came to it. Nothing has changed there. They now also offer some pay services, but do not FORCE it on you like OKB. In OKB you HAD to pay, there were no free options. I cannot see BBO becoming anything remotely like OKB while it is led by fred, sheri, uday and co.