MSA misbehaving

All Things Chess
1

For the past several months I have been able to enter the USCF ID numbers for about 35 players into the MSA search list, and I’d get a nice listing of everyone likely to play at our club, complete with up to date ratings.

I.e.:

12676217, 13254398, 12638049, 12686604, 13651651, 12545365, 12396991,
11095461, 10058970, 10108730, 10164176, 12710116, 12445887, 12111440,
10267170, 13904274, 12552425, 12872596, 12452482, 12897595, 12041570,
14246933, 12119310, 12432993, 13988972, 12498798, 12600596, 10153492,
12846477, 12433767, 13863068, 12814567, 12797268, 12728404, 12770335,
13211234

When I tried to do it this morning while entering a rating report, I was limited to six numbers.

Has someone tinkered with this, meaning I’ll now have to enter no more than six numbers at a time (and cut/paste the results), or is this a glitch, or am I forgetting to do something?

Thanks in advance, Mike.

2

I just answered my question, sortof. For some weird reason, in the past MSA did not recognize carriage returns. I simply cut/pasted the numbers and that was that. Now apparently it breaks off the list at the first carriage return.

Solution: cut/paste into Notepad, remove the carriage returns, select all, copy, paste into MSA.

VOILA!

3

Moderator Mode: On

I’m glad you figured it out.

For the record, these forums are not the place to report problems with the website.

There is a contact form category specifically for ‘website’ issues.

Someone can email the office, or even PM Mike Nolan about the areas like the MSA. He will get an email letting him know there is a PM to read as he no longer spends a lot of time every day in the Forums, and he doesn’t read every thread.

The major problem with posting complaints on the Forums is that there will be almost certainly be NO official responses here. As noted Mike Nolan doesn’t frequent these forums much at all anymore. I don’t think Phil Smith even reads it. Bill Hall is a very infrequent poster as is Daniel Lucas.

These forums are just not an area where staff are expected to have an active presence, because there are more direct ways to reach the staff.

4

Still, areas like this seem appropriate for general reading, as several other users may have had similar experiences, and would benefit from the posts of others.

Bill Smythe

5

In that, I agree with you Bill. However if someone wants to get the attention of a staff member or paid consultant regarding the website, this place won’t do it.

If someone wants help in figuring out how to do something on the website and other forum members might help, that’s fine.

6

I realize I ended my initial message with a plea to Mike Nolan – I didn’t know he stopped visiting the forums.

Regardless, I learned my “batch-fetch USCF ID” technique here, from another forum reader, during a general discussion about getting member data off MSA in some usable form. I don’t see anything wrong with sharing these problems and ideas of general interest with other players and TDs.

Particularly when the question/complaint is policy-related (this one definitely was not), it’s good to get others on the bandwagon. My “complaint” about the exclusive use of post-event ratings on the player stat pages was an example of that.

adp

7

It has been my experience that Mike Nolan takes note of what appears in these forums, as do a number of USCF staffers. A recent EB meeting apparently tasked staff with reading these forums, presumably for exactly this kind of reason.

8

Moderator Mode: On

Mike Nolan told me what I wrote earlier, so Mr. Bogner is wrong about what he writes.

9

It could be that both Ron and Hal are right.
I’ve received the occasional PM from USCF people (one just last week in response to a post that I had not anticipated getting such a response to), but not necessarily in a timely manner. So if you want action soon then listen to Ron. If you want a wider audience that will eventually include decision influencers then maybe you can listen to Hal.

10

Moderator Mode: On

Jeff I have written what you have said in an earlier post. If people want to get the attention of staff, this is not the place to do so because they no longer frequent these forums as they did in the past, and there are specific ways to contact the staff.

This is not my personal opinion but fact as this came to me through official lines of the USCF administration.

Hal can disagree having his own and uninformed opinion, but he is wrong. These forums are no longer the place to complain about something on the website to get a staff member to respond either in words or actions.

Yes, if someone wants other posters’ opinions of how to deal with areas of the website then these forums are the place to communicate with other forum members.

11

Ron - It’s not necessary to call me wrong and uninformed, when in fact what I know is based on information and experience, from both inside and outside. It’s unseemly. At worst, it might be fair to say that I am “differently informed”.

It is also quite reasonable to imagine that some might wish problems reported in ways that don’t tell others that the problems exist. Too many times, though, reports go without response when directed privately.

Certainly, comments here are read by EB members and some staff or consultants. How communications works out of view of most or all of us here is something we can try to guess at, but certainly many of these folks have the ability to let one another know when something needs attention.

12

Moderator Mode: On

Hal, when you make statements saying that people can contact the staff regarding this website and its issues you are wrong, plain and simple. I’m sorry if you are sensitive to my stating this fact.

Also, you are no longer on the inside of the USCF and/or this website, to my knowledge. Even if you are, you apparently are not on the inside to what the paid staff do and do not do regarding this forum.

You are uninformed regarding the latest news I shared in my first post in this thread and you are wrong in how people should go about communicating with the staff regarding this website.

As I said numerous times, it is perfectly alright for someone to post here to communicate with other members of the forum regarding this website or other Chess things. It is wrong for them to post here expecting a staff member to read it and/or respond.

13

The forum may not be the office’s preferred way of getting the staff’s attention, but nevertheless it’s not a completely ineffective or pointless way of doing so either. For example, if someone tried to contact the office about an important issue and either received no response or an inadequate response, the forum might be the only way of bringing that lack of a timely response to an urgent matter to the attention of the public.

A case in point would be the issue of the World Youth participation fee. Whatever position one might take on that particular issue, it is a fact that the degree of controversy surrounding the issue was brought to the office’s attention, as well as everyone else’s attention, on this forum, and the office did respond to that issue on this forum, quite likely precisely because of the fact that the issue was being discussed on this forum.

Frankly, I think that unless the issue of “Publicly Addressing The USCF Office On The USCF Forums” is something which is specifically prohibited by the AUG, then there do not seem to be grounds for prohibiting it, especially compared to some of the other topics which are already considered to be sufficiently acceptable to continue discussing.

14

I don’t know why this has turned into something so complicated.

I agree with Ron that direct contact with the USCF and each specific department head is more practical. They are there for the very purpose of handling the problems associated with all areas of the USCF. Use the contact list and it will allow you to leave whatever request or remark you need to make and you will get a response.

As a TD, and also a new correspondence player I have needed to communicate back and forth numerous times and the USCF has never failed to respond. However, as stated earlier, for purposes of general discussion the forums might be ok, but I still think that if you have a real problem that is why there is a Contact link right under the USCF Sales logo in the upper right hand corner of the page.

15

The more I think about it, the less sense this all makes to me. It seems to me that the major purpose of the forums is to open lines of communication with the individual members to the powers that be. That is the way that it has been mostly in the past.

For example there was a thread just started asking if the August Chess Life has been mailed yet? This person could easily call up the Office and ask that question. And then maybe 10 or 20 others could do the same. But if someone in the know answers here then those others won’t have to call the office and thus save the office people time. And that is just one question.

Without some sort of Official presence here the value of the forums plummet.