Hello, in my opinion table masters shouldn't be able to put spectators in the game with ctrl r, they simply should not be in the replace a player list if they turned on spectator mode with f3

Agree with this one.

Ideally it would be much better if you can add a bot to a game at any given time so you don't have to kick players and invite them back later just to be a spectator while they are away. This is the reason why people add bots at the start of games and ask a friend to go onto spectator mode or do it themselves as you suggested. If you couldn't go onto spectator mode and put in a bot then you would leave a game and they would put in a bot for you to only return again. Do you really think that makes more sense than what we are doing now? People only do it because they could be away for some time so saving themselves this problem of going in and out of the game later.

i agree too

Hmm, what you said seems not very related to my topic.

If what I said wasn't the case then can you explaine it more clearly please? From what I read you wasn't happy about people pressing f3, the table master adding a bot then replacing the bot with the person who originally pressed f3. That means that the table has a spare bot witch the table master can use to replace a person should that person be unable to play or suddenly disconnects.

Well i didn't necessarily mean a bot, it can be a game in progress which you joined and if a person needs to go he replaces him with you because he didn't know you were a spectator. In any case, it's logical that if you press f3 you don't want to be in a game.

well if that is the case then the table master should liaise or ask the person who is on spectator mode if, he or she wants to take the place. This what happens i believe. Noone just replaces right away unless that table master is up for some mischeive. But according to your initial post it did showed you were not happy with the things which Ynwa explained. It seems you are trying to change it around now.

No offence but that what even i understood from the first post.

Having possibility to replace a player who is playing with the one who pressed f3 is just silly and makes no sense.

I had no offense against Ynwa, i just said that what he said isn't what i was meaning to say with this topic. Yes it's right that we can always ask but if we say that we might remove a bunch of features from playroom just because we can ask. The person who replaced us might not be good in english and it's not super weird or unusual that when someone needs to go, if someone is on the table you replace the person with that player. Yes, you can always ask but this way it's much faster, and if the person pressed f3 we can already assume he doesn't want to play.

I don't think you were being disrespectful. What you have said now is different from what I responded too.

"he didn't know you were a spectator. In any case, it's logical that if you press f3 you don't want to be in a game."

If you have joined a table it is impossible to know if that person is in spectator mode or not unless you are Uri Geller.

Most people come to play so if they have language barrier issues then if they assume you want to play then I don't see anything wrong if they put you in the game you joined. After all, it is hardly crime of the century. if you don't want to play then you can just leave the table if the person who is table master doesn't understand what you are saying. We already know that a huge percentage of people speak no or very little English and have just come to play and that is perfectly fine with me.

Why don't we close the suggestions and comments section and make it not exist? No matter what anyone on this forum says, spectators should not be in the replace a player list, simply because you are a spectator. Speaking different languages was just an example, and has nothing to do with the actual suggestion, that was an example to show why would you put a spectator in to the game.

well you should have said I don't think it should be possible to replace players if they have spectator mode switched on.

I think it is fine how it is at present. I know in tournaments that people have issues sometimes getting people to switch them on and off so I am happy how things are at present.

Well i did say that but OK, but how is replacing players related to players having troubles turning on spectator mode on tournaments?

Quite simple, it is what you can and can't do with the f3 spectator function and the flexability it gives. What is more important is that I don't want it changed. Being able to add an extra bot would be nicer but I don't have big issues with it at all.

Are you serious? My topic doesn't say let's destroy the spectator mode and make it not work, it just needs a change which is illogical with replacing players.

well, as I see it, the problem regarding spectators and replacement is not that serious. If someone is on spectator mode, it doesn't necessarily mean that the person doesn't want to play if someone needs a replacement. You can always ask the person if he or she wants to join, and if there are language issues, or if the table master replaces without asking you, you can always leave if you don't want to play. Further more, people might not always be aware that they are on spectator mode, or they might have turned it on for other reasons.

The only thing i agree with is that it's definitely not a major issue, just a minor thing. For which other reasons would the person turn the spectator mode on? Anyways this is probably my last reply to this topic no matter what the end result gets to be, it's sad how there's a disagreement for every suggestion on this platform.

Its definitely true that the option of replacing someone with a spectator is plain wrong.
The spectator may be multitasking, busy with phone, whatever, and then what happens is that at least one of the players gets frustrated, and kicks or bans whatever, which is, of course, not the ideal thing to happen.
The spectator has to get kicked without any mistake... of course it is not your fault to multitask when you have pressed f3.

So, definitely i think that this option has to be removed.
If, you want a spectator to be replaced, you could speak to him and request him to press f3 again and with his consent do the job of replacement.

Of course its much better than replacing someone who is unwilling to play without his consent.

Thank you, that's exactly what i keept saying and what i was trying to say in this topic.

Not all minor problems can be fixed as the saying goes, all fingers are not equal. We can't get everything perfect, lol.

I see your point, and for me I have no issue what so ever with this setting as I myself am not at all a gamer here.
But I did not know that miner posts have to be disagreed upon.

Krrish if we look it from your point we should not write any suggestion here

Yes, all minor thing can and should be fixed, because this is a program and not life, and also this is a forum for suggesting features and reporting bugs no matter if they are minor or major, and i seriously can't understand why are some people on here thinking they are main developers to say things like no this wont be fixed and similar.

I see that some people are only defending bugs god knows for what reason. Maybe to make fun of others? I agree with you Nikola, let's take the suggestion of edit your post via client for example. Everyone went like, oh you are lazy it's easy to use brouser and stuff. Let's say i have playroom installed, and then I have microsoft edge witch sucks shit and i want to edit my last post. Tell me use Internet Explorer? Why maybe, but my NVDA keeps crashing whenever i go there. See I have no brouser. Why not make life easier and add that feature. That was totally out of topic I know, but it was just an example how the PR comunity keep on beeing against every bug or suggestion that people post in here.
Best regards.

I dont really understand how this could in any way be seen as criticising anything. People are only saying what we/they think, nothing more. It's not about being against or not against, it's about stating opinions. Don't misunderstand me here. :)

Opinion to what? To bugfixing? I am not missunderstanding you, but there's simply no reason for any opinion not because i don't like it, but because this is like it or no, a bug and only that. There's just no reason to have any different opinion than to fix it. It's only on this forum that people are against something. Fine i can understand if it would make your experience worse or destroy your favorite game, but no that's only a simple change which is logical. And yes, i disagree in the same way with comments about editing posts, it would be much more convenient if we could do that, and you have browser isn't right because well, i have browser for playroom forum too but it's integrated in to the client.

well, since this is discussed at all, there are surely other people here who have a different opinion than you.

Well i don't say that there aren't that's normal, but i said clearly that there's no need for disagreement as this doesn't change the way spectator mode works but people keep failing to understand the point so let's just move on and forget reporting bugs.

I do think i understand you, but i still disagree. anyway, let's accept that people do have different opinions and merely state them. That does not mean that we still can't report buggs we consider to be problematic, so I don't quite get your point here