[Walddk]

We have addressed this topic before, but only superficially. There is more substance to it after the WSMG in Beijing because I have received some messages from other users, mostly from people who were not happy. I got messages to this effect:

"Why don't we have English commentary when this (top) pair is playing."
"How do you expect me to enjoy the show when I have this (foreign) language?"
"Why can't you just mix the commentary?"

As you may have guessed, these complaints (not many I would like to add) came from users in English speaking countries, for instance when we had Polish commentary in a room where Meckwell appeared. Those users could not understand why we did not have English commentary when this American top pair played.

"Everyone here wants to understand what the commentators write, and we can't when Polish is all we see", was what I got from some.

I can certainly understand this point of view, but let me try to explain how it works. The minute I know which matches we get the following day, often very late before the actual broadcast, I get in touch with my contacts in countries involved in that particular broadcast. I ask them if they can provide commentary in XXXish for this match.

Next step is that those people get in touch with local potential commentators to find out if they are available. This may of course take a while, because there is no guarantee that they are at home to take a phone call or an e-mail.

Finally, the local organisers get back to me to tell me "yes" or "no". In most cases I get a "yes", and then I will let the closed room have Polish, Turkish, Japanese, Chinese, whatever.

Please note that there will always be at least one table per match with English commentary. Since we can't know the line-ups in advance, it is therefore also impossible to predict where top pairs like Meckwell, Lauria-Versace, Zia-Rosenberg are going to play. Consequently, we may see Meckwell in a room where I have scheduled Polish commentary. We did a few days ago.

"But why don't you just have English in all rooms" you may ask. That would work for people in English speaking countries, and also for people in countries where most people speak and understand English.

However, and this is the crux of the matter, it will not work for Mrs. Klimowicz in Warsaw, Mr. Zahan in Ankara, Mrs. Yu Li Peng in Shanghai, Mr. Cannavaro in Milan, and Mr. Okamoto in Tokyo. Very few in those countries understand English, and we have thousands of spectators from exactly these five countries. I am sure Uday can tell us how many.

If English was all we offered them, we would let them down, would we not? In my view it is selfish when "you" say that English is a world language and that we therefore should go with that language only. It is indeed a world language, but it's not the only one.

As an example, let me remind you that twice as many have Mandarin (Chinese) as their first language. So should we just brush them aside if we have a match between USA and China? We should not in my opinion.

Finally, let me address the issue regarding mixed languages in one room. As it is now, we subscribe to the policy that the commentators must be able to understand each other. We feel that it's important that Kit Woolsey understands Song Zhao's comments, and vice versa. Otherwise, the commentary will not be ideal when one asks in East and the other one responds in West.

So long as we don't have multiple language channels to choose from, I think the best way to go about the problem is to do what we do today. A little of everything to please as many as possible. In fact, I think it's a great service when we offer commentary in 11 languages like we did from Beijing.

It is certainly no disgrace to speak nothing but English, but that also applies to the user in Turkey who speaks nothing but Turkish. Tolerance and understanding are the key words as far as I am concerned.

Constructive criticism is obviously welcomed. I will have a look at all posts (hopefully many) in this thread and consider once I have seen everyone's views.

Roland

[pclayton]

I like Hrothgar's idea about channels for different languages. Surely this is something that can be added into Flash.

[TimG]

Walddk, on Oct 17 2008, 11:03 AM, said:

As you may have guessed, these complaints (not many I would like to add) came from users in English speaking countries, for instance when we had Polish commentary in a room where Meckwell appeared. Those users could not understand why we did not have English commentary when this American top pair played.

I've watched a bit of vugraph. Plenty of Italians, Poles and Norwegians appear on vugraph and only rarely do I see these broadcast in anything but English.

Hrothgar's channel idea is good, but it would require many more commentators and be quite a headache for the coordinator -- you'd have to know who would be playing ahead of time and line up commentators in multiple languages for each match.

This uni-lingual, English speaking observer, thinks that those who are complaining about not being able to watch English commentary for the matches they want to see are being more than a bit ugly. And, I'm not looking forward to the time when a match between Norway and Italy is broadcast in only Italian and Norwegian.

[Echognome]

I also agree that all of these problems go away once you can "tune in" to the channel of commentary that you wish to view. For example, I bet that a few rooms where you can openly chat to everyone would be appreciated for those that like to hear themselves speak. Alas, I have no idea about how technically difficult it would be to introduce the channels.

[Walddk]

TimG, on Oct 17 2008, 06:21 PM, said:

And, I'm not looking forward to the time when a match between Norway and Italy is broadcast in only Italian and Norwegian.

As I pointed out above, this is not going to happen. We always have one room with English commentary.

Roland

[TimG]

Walddk, on Oct 17 2008, 11:26 AM, said:

TimG, on Oct 17 2008, 06:21 PM, said:

And, I'm not looking forward to the time when a match between Norway and Italy is broadcast in only Italian and Norwegian.

As I pointed out above, this is not going to happen. We always have one room with English commentary.

I don't see why it shouldn't happen. Why should you exclude Italian only or Norwegian only speakers from a match between those two countries?

Quote

As you may have guessed, these complaints (not many I would like to add) came from users in English speaking countries, for instance when we had Polish commentary in a room where Meckwell appeared. Those users could not understand why we did not have English commentary when this American top pair played.

(I assume Meckwell was facing a top Polish pair.) So, you were going to either exclude the English speaking people who wanted to hear about Meckwell or the Polish speaking people who wanted to hear about their top pair.

I think the proper response to this complaint is to explain to the person why there is commentary in only one language in any given room and that this policy necessarily mean that some people will not be able to "listen" in their native tongue and that it happens far more frequently that it is the non-English speakers that are inconvenienced.

I watched very little vugraph from Beijing because it was usually available during normal sleeping hours. I know that the US is not the only English speaking country in the world (but I bet the complaints came primarily from US citizens), but what areas of the world are likely to be watching should be an important consideration. Broadcasting Meckwell in Polish between 1AM and 4AM in the US shouldn't be met with nearly as many objections as it would if the broadcast was between 7PM and 10PM in the US.

[Walddk]

TimG, on Oct 17 2008, 07:28 PM, said:

Walddk, on Oct 17 2008, 11:26 AM, said:

TimG, on Oct 17 2008, 06:21 PM, said:

And, I'm not looking forward to the time when a match between Norway and Italy is broadcast in only Italian and Norwegian.

As I pointed out above, this is not going to happen. We always have one room with English commentary.

I don't see why it shouldn't happen. Why should you exclude Italian only or Norwegian only speakers from a match between those two countries?

In your example we don't exclude anyone, because people in Norway understand English. Another scenario, however, is a match between Italy and Poland, which in fact took place in the quarter-finals. Then tossing a coin is the only option.

Why must we have English at all times? Because this is an American site, and the official language is English. I think we will get many more complaints if an Italy-Poland match had Italian in one room and Polish in another. I can't tell for sure, because it never happened.

I am open to all suggestions, but I doubt that Fred wants me to change our policy of English in at least one room.

Regarding your comment on time zones and which countries to show, I agree with you. Unfortunately, at major championships BBO does not decide which matches we get, but I know that the organisers usually are aware of the fact that a match involving USA will be better suited for the 11 pm than for the 2:20 am EDT slot.

We can't change time zones, so when an event takes place in China, you are not going to get prime time in USA, at least not on the east coast.

Roland

[TimG]

Walddk, on Oct 17 2008, 12:58 PM, said:

Regarding your comment on time zones and which countries to show, I agree with you. Unfortunately, at major championships BBO does not decide which matches we get, but I know that the organisers usually are aware of the fact that a match involving USA will be better suited for the 11 pm than for the 2:20 am EDT slot.

I understand you can't pick your matches, but you can pick your language for commentators.

[Codo]

Leave it like it is, you do a marvellous job.

And one more thought: The guys who are not able to understand english can and will hardly follow this threat, but I belive that you should have these native language channels exactly for them.

Besides: If memory serves me right, In the final of the WSMG you had around 2.500 in the english room and 1.700 in the italinan room. SO if this is no argument for having different languages, what is one?

[Walddk]

Codo, on Oct 17 2008, 11:59 PM, said:

Besides: If memory serves me right, In the final of the WSMG you had around 2.500 in the english room and 1.700 in the italinan room. SO if this is no argument for having different languages, what is one?

It's virtually impossible to judge. Some go to a particular room because of language, others because of players, and the rest depending on which commentators they like (and do not like).

The perfect solution is of course the multiple channel opportunity, but since this does not exist in the current version, we have to deal with the issue as it is. The current solution is not perfect, but given the circumstances it's the best there is in my opinion.

This my personal view: I suspect that many people from English speaking countries don't really care if we provide this service or not. As long as they can get English.

I would (rather not) like to see all the complaints we get if we have Polish and Turkish in a match between Poland and Turkey - and no English. This is theory because it is not going to happen. Our policy of at least one table with English prevents that.

So as it is now, people who understand English are the privileged ones. They will always get a language they understand. That is not always the case for Mr. Safranek in Prague.

Roland

[matmat]

time for everyone to learn Elbonian. they're taking over.

[bidule4]

2/3 languages at the same table looks ok for me.

ie germany-china = english + german + chinese

[TimG]

Sort of along the lines of separate channels, would it be possible to have the vugraph feed sent to two tables?

[fred]

At some point I expect we will do a general overhaul of the vugraph facility in the Flash client. When that time comes it would not surprise me if we do something along the lines of user-selectable commentary channels based not only one language, but also on skill level. Presumbly tournament organizers and/or Roland could define which channel(s) would be made available at which tables. Maybe we will even create an "open" channel that anyone is welcome to contribute and subscribe to and maybe we will let groups of friends create their own private channels.

It might be challenging to fold something like this into the Windows client even if we were willing to release a new version (which is something we are hoping not to have to do again), but you never know.

Uday and I have some other ideas regarding "vugraph management issues" that we think would make life better for Roland, operators, commentators, as well as vugraph fans.

But until any of this happens, I am strongly in favor of the current policy (tables that contain commentary in a single language other than English that is spoken by people who rate to be interested in the match in question along with an English-only table broadcasting the "other room" of the same match).

Fred Gitelman
Bridge Base Inc.
www.bridgebase.com

[Walddk]

You may argue that it's unnecessary to have Danish commentary in one room when we have USA v Denmark, because "everyone" in Denmark speaks English. That is a valid point.

However, this is not an irrevocable decision, even when the broadcast is in progress. Let me give you an example from a year ago or so when we had a broadcast from the Norwegian Championships.

We offered English in one room and mixed Scandinavian commentary in the other. It transpired that Helness-Helgemo were playing in the room with Scandinavian commentary, which we could not know until we saw it.

We had many hundreds of spectators there, and after a while I suggested that the commentators switched to English in order to please as many kibitzers as possible. Not a problem. Scandinavian commentators can do that in no time at all.

When it comes to say Polish, it is not that easy. First, our Polish commentators can't switch to English just like that. Some have some knowledge of English, but it's not good enough for vugraph commentary. And secondly, even if it was possible, we would disappoint the many Polish viewers who came to that room for Polish commentary.

So a switch would benefit English speaking viewers, whereas we would make life difficult for the vast majority of Polish viewers who don't understand English.

Roland

[NickRW]

Well, I think, given the current lack of multiple channels, that the present policy is probably about as good as you can get.

I watched some of both rooms of the England/Italy match. In one room I didn't understand the majority of the commentary - it didn't really spoil my enjoyment - some of the commentary in the other room where I could understand was not stuff I really needed or wanted to read anyway.

Nick

[mrdct]

Having multiple commentary channels is clearly the best solution and from the sounds of it, this is on the software development agenda.

Once thing that slightly peeved me from the WMSG final was that the open room was always running about 20 minutes behind as the feature match, thereby giving the superior viewing experience due to the availability of comparitives, and it was in Italian for all 6 segments. It would seem more fair to share that around a bit.

It's perhaps a tad selfish being an English speaker, but I think the dual language protocol ought to be English in the open room and "other" in the closed room.

[Walddk]

mrdct, on Oct 18 2008, 09:30 AM, said:

It's perhaps a tad selfish being an English speaker, but I think the dual language protocol ought to be English in the open room and "other" in the closed room.

It has been a tradition since our vugraph start in 2001 that Italian commentary is in the open room, whereas all "other" languages are spoken in the closed. I don't think there is a reason why this can't be changed. I have no strong feelings, though, but I know that some WBF officials in Beijing were wondering why it was like this.

Roland

[Cascade]

I watched some of the vugraph and when I did I chose which pairs I wanted to watch independent of the commentary. I know I experienced at least English, Italian and Polish commentary.

I found it distracting when English comments were made in an otherwise non-English commentary. I am far from fluent in Italian or Polish.

...Actually some of the commentary might have been in a strange North American dialect.

[hrothgar]

Its the weekend, and I finally have enough time to post again:

Couple quick comments about multiple channels and the like:

1. As I understand matters, the chat systems that are built into most of the massively multiplayer online games are built on top of what's know as IRC (Internet Relay Chat). I suspect that games like World of Warcraft base their chat systems on IRC because

* there's plenty of implementations already available for use
* other people have already done all the heavy lifting
* there are enormous benefits in maintaining a consistent command set (If you look at the command set that WoW users for channel creation, channel inspection, and the like its essentially identical to other IRC type systems)

2. I'd like to address a comment that Fred made:

Quote

Presumably tournament organizers and/or Roland could define which channel(s) would be made available at which tables. Maybe we will even create an "open" channel that anyone is welcome to contribute and subscribe to and maybe we will let groups of friends create their own private channels

From my perspective, the last part of this quote is the most significant. IRC is predicated on the assumption that most channels are run by individuals. Sure, most gaming sites have a couple centrally administered channels that are used for server wide broadcasts and like... However, most chat takes place on private channels that are administered by local guilds/clans/affinity groups