#75365: "Allow submitting optional explanation with a clue"
Apakah laporan ini berkenaan?
Apakah yang berlaku? Sila pilih pilihan di bawah
Apakah yang berlaku? Sila pilih pilihan di bawah
Sila semak apakah sudah ada laporan mengenai subjek yang sama
Jika ya, sila nyatakan untuk laporan ini. Laporan dengan undian yang paling diberikan PRIORITI!
| # | Status | Votes | Game | Type | Title | Last update |
|---|
Penerangan yang terperinci
-
• Sila salin/tampal mesej masalah yang anda dapat lihat di skrin, jika ada.
When submitting a clue, I think it would be helpful to have the option to also submit a short explanation. This would be visible only to the other clue givers and not the active player, until after the active player has submitted their guess.
The main reason for this is I regularly see cases where clues are invalidated when they should not be, because the person doing the validation did not realize it was a valid clue. Here are two examples that happened in the last few days:
1) "Rohirrim" was invalidated. This is a proper name in Lord of the Rings. I think it was invalidated because the person reviewing the clues did not realize this, so they either thought it was a made up word or maybe the answer in a foreign language.
2) "Baaa" was invalidated because the person reviewing the clues thought it was a made up word. It is true that it is not a word, but "baa" is a word (for the sound a sheep makes), and the rules explicitly give example of elongating words for onomatopoeia effect ("Riiiiinnnnng" is the example in the rulebook)
In both of these cases, if the clue giver had been able to submit a brief explanation, it could have helped the reviewer realize the clue was actually valid. -
• Tolong jelaskan apa yang anda ingin buat, apa yang telah anda buat dan apa yang telah terjadi
• Apakah browser anda?
Google Chrome v107
-
• Tolong salin/lekat teks yang dipaparkan dalam bahasa inggeris dan bukannya bahasa anda. Sekiranya anda ada screenshot bug ini (amalan yang baik), anda boleh gunakan Imgur.com untuk muatnaik dan copy/paste pautan itu di sini.
When submitting a clue, I think it would be helpful to have the option to also submit a short explanation. This would be visible only to the other clue givers and not the active player, until after the active player has submitted their guess.
The main reason for this is I regularly see cases where clues are invalidated when they should not be, because the person doing the validation did not realize it was a valid clue. Here are two examples that happened in the last few days:
1) "Rohirrim" was invalidated. This is a proper name in Lord of the Rings. I think it was invalidated because the person reviewing the clues did not realize this, so they either thought it was a made up word or maybe the answer in a foreign language.
2) "Baaa" was invalidated because the person reviewing the clues thought it was a made up word. It is true that it is not a word, but "baa" is a word (for the sound a sheep makes), and the rules explicitly give example of elongating words for onomatopoeia effect ("Riiiiinnnnng" is the example in the rulebook)
In both of these cases, if the clue giver had been able to submit a brief explanation, it could have helped the reviewer realize the clue was actually valid. -
• Adakah teks ini tersedia dalam sistem terjemahan ? Jika ya, adakah ia diterjemahkan selama lebih daripada 24 jam?
• Apakah browser anda?
Google Chrome v107
-
• Tolong jelaskan cadangan anda dengan tepat dan ringkas supaya semudah mungkin untuk memahami apa yang anda maksudkan.
When submitting a clue, I think it would be helpful to have the option to also submit a short explanation. This would be visible only to the other clue givers and not the active player, until after the active player has submitted their guess.
The main reason for this is I regularly see cases where clues are invalidated when they should not be, because the person doing the validation did not realize it was a valid clue. Here are two examples that happened in the last few days:
1) "Rohirrim" was invalidated. This is a proper name in Lord of the Rings. I think it was invalidated because the person reviewing the clues did not realize this, so they either thought it was a made up word or maybe the answer in a foreign language.
2) "Baaa" was invalidated because the person reviewing the clues thought it was a made up word. It is true that it is not a word, but "baa" is a word (for the sound a sheep makes), and the rules explicitly give example of elongating words for onomatopoeia effect ("Riiiiinnnnng" is the example in the rulebook)
In both of these cases, if the clue giver had been able to submit a brief explanation, it could have helped the reviewer realize the clue was actually valid. • Apakah browser anda?
Google Chrome v107
-
• Apa yang dipaparkan pada skrin apabila anda disekat (Skrin kosong? Antara muka permainan? Mesej ralat?)
When submitting a clue, I think it would be helpful to have the option to also submit a short explanation. This would be visible only to the other clue givers and not the active player, until after the active player has submitted their guess.
The main reason for this is I regularly see cases where clues are invalidated when they should not be, because the person doing the validation did not realize it was a valid clue. Here are two examples that happened in the last few days:
1) "Rohirrim" was invalidated. This is a proper name in Lord of the Rings. I think it was invalidated because the person reviewing the clues did not realize this, so they either thought it was a made up word or maybe the answer in a foreign language.
2) "Baaa" was invalidated because the person reviewing the clues thought it was a made up word. It is true that it is not a word, but "baa" is a word (for the sound a sheep makes), and the rules explicitly give example of elongating words for onomatopoeia effect ("Riiiiinnnnng" is the example in the rulebook)
In both of these cases, if the clue giver had been able to submit a brief explanation, it could have helped the reviewer realize the clue was actually valid. • Apakah browser anda?
Google Chrome v107
-
• Bahagian peraturan yang mana tidak dihormati oleh penyesuaian BGA
When submitting a clue, I think it would be helpful to have the option to also submit a short explanation. This would be visible only to the other clue givers and not the active player, until after the active player has submitted their guess.
The main reason for this is I regularly see cases where clues are invalidated when they should not be, because the person doing the validation did not realize it was a valid clue. Here are two examples that happened in the last few days:
1) "Rohirrim" was invalidated. This is a proper name in Lord of the Rings. I think it was invalidated because the person reviewing the clues did not realize this, so they either thought it was a made up word or maybe the answer in a foreign language.
2) "Baaa" was invalidated because the person reviewing the clues thought it was a made up word. It is true that it is not a word, but "baa" is a word (for the sound a sheep makes), and the rules explicitly give example of elongating words for onomatopoeia effect ("Riiiiinnnnng" is the example in the rulebook)
In both of these cases, if the clue giver had been able to submit a brief explanation, it could have helped the reviewer realize the clue was actually valid. -
• Adakah kelanggaran peraturan boleh dilihat di ulangan permainan? Jikanya ya, pada langkah berapa?
• Apakah browser anda?
Google Chrome v107
-
• Apakan tindakan yang anda mahu lakukan?
When submitting a clue, I think it would be helpful to have the option to also submit a short explanation. This would be visible only to the other clue givers and not the active player, until after the active player has submitted their guess.
The main reason for this is I regularly see cases where clues are invalidated when they should not be, because the person doing the validation did not realize it was a valid clue. Here are two examples that happened in the last few days:
1) "Rohirrim" was invalidated. This is a proper name in Lord of the Rings. I think it was invalidated because the person reviewing the clues did not realize this, so they either thought it was a made up word or maybe the answer in a foreign language.
2) "Baaa" was invalidated because the person reviewing the clues thought it was a made up word. It is true that it is not a word, but "baa" is a word (for the sound a sheep makes), and the rules explicitly give example of elongating words for onomatopoeia effect ("Riiiiinnnnng" is the example in the rulebook)
In both of these cases, if the clue giver had been able to submit a brief explanation, it could have helped the reviewer realize the clue was actually valid. -
• Apa yang anda cuba lakukan untuk mencetuskan tindakan permainan ini?
-
• Apa yang berlaku apabila anda cuba melakukan ini (mesej ralat, mesej bar status permainan, ...)?
• Apakah browser anda?
Google Chrome v107
-
• Pada peringkat mana semasa permainan , masalah itu berlaku (apakah arahan semasa permainan tersebut)?
When submitting a clue, I think it would be helpful to have the option to also submit a short explanation. This would be visible only to the other clue givers and not the active player, until after the active player has submitted their guess.
The main reason for this is I regularly see cases where clues are invalidated when they should not be, because the person doing the validation did not realize it was a valid clue. Here are two examples that happened in the last few days:
1) "Rohirrim" was invalidated. This is a proper name in Lord of the Rings. I think it was invalidated because the person reviewing the clues did not realize this, so they either thought it was a made up word or maybe the answer in a foreign language.
2) "Baaa" was invalidated because the person reviewing the clues thought it was a made up word. It is true that it is not a word, but "baa" is a word (for the sound a sheep makes), and the rules explicitly give example of elongating words for onomatopoeia effect ("Riiiiinnnnng" is the example in the rulebook)
In both of these cases, if the clue giver had been able to submit a brief explanation, it could have helped the reviewer realize the clue was actually valid. -
• Apa yang berlaku apabila anda cuba melakukan tindakan permainan (mesej ralat, mesej bar status permainan, ...)?
• Apakah browser anda?
Google Chrome v107
-
• Tolong jelaskan masalah pemaparan. Sekiranya anda ada screenshot bug ini (amalan yang baik), anda boleh gunakan Imgur.com untuk muatnaik dan copy/paste pautan itu di sini.
When submitting a clue, I think it would be helpful to have the option to also submit a short explanation. This would be visible only to the other clue givers and not the active player, until after the active player has submitted their guess.
The main reason for this is I regularly see cases where clues are invalidated when they should not be, because the person doing the validation did not realize it was a valid clue. Here are two examples that happened in the last few days:
1) "Rohirrim" was invalidated. This is a proper name in Lord of the Rings. I think it was invalidated because the person reviewing the clues did not realize this, so they either thought it was a made up word or maybe the answer in a foreign language.
2) "Baaa" was invalidated because the person reviewing the clues thought it was a made up word. It is true that it is not a word, but "baa" is a word (for the sound a sheep makes), and the rules explicitly give example of elongating words for onomatopoeia effect ("Riiiiinnnnng" is the example in the rulebook)
In both of these cases, if the clue giver had been able to submit a brief explanation, it could have helped the reviewer realize the clue was actually valid. • Apakah browser anda?
Google Chrome v107
-
• Tolong salin/lekat teks yang dipaparkan dalam bahasa inggeris dan bukannya bahasa anda. Sekiranya anda ada screenshot bug ini (amalan yang baik), anda boleh gunakan Imgur.com untuk muatnaik dan copy/paste pautan itu di sini.
When submitting a clue, I think it would be helpful to have the option to also submit a short explanation. This would be visible only to the other clue givers and not the active player, until after the active player has submitted their guess.
The main reason for this is I regularly see cases where clues are invalidated when they should not be, because the person doing the validation did not realize it was a valid clue. Here are two examples that happened in the last few days:
1) "Rohirrim" was invalidated. This is a proper name in Lord of the Rings. I think it was invalidated because the person reviewing the clues did not realize this, so they either thought it was a made up word or maybe the answer in a foreign language.
2) "Baaa" was invalidated because the person reviewing the clues thought it was a made up word. It is true that it is not a word, but "baa" is a word (for the sound a sheep makes), and the rules explicitly give example of elongating words for onomatopoeia effect ("Riiiiinnnnng" is the example in the rulebook)
In both of these cases, if the clue giver had been able to submit a brief explanation, it could have helped the reviewer realize the clue was actually valid. -
• Adakah teks ini tersedia dalam sistem terjemahan ? Jika ya, adakah ia diterjemahkan selama lebih daripada 24 jam?
• Apakah browser anda?
Google Chrome v107
-
• Tolong jelaskan cadangan anda dengan tepat dan ringkas supaya semudah mungkin untuk memahami apa yang anda maksudkan.
When submitting a clue, I think it would be helpful to have the option to also submit a short explanation. This would be visible only to the other clue givers and not the active player, until after the active player has submitted their guess.
The main reason for this is I regularly see cases where clues are invalidated when they should not be, because the person doing the validation did not realize it was a valid clue. Here are two examples that happened in the last few days:
1) "Rohirrim" was invalidated. This is a proper name in Lord of the Rings. I think it was invalidated because the person reviewing the clues did not realize this, so they either thought it was a made up word or maybe the answer in a foreign language.
2) "Baaa" was invalidated because the person reviewing the clues thought it was a made up word. It is true that it is not a word, but "baa" is a word (for the sound a sheep makes), and the rules explicitly give example of elongating words for onomatopoeia effect ("Riiiiinnnnng" is the example in the rulebook)
In both of these cases, if the clue giver had been able to submit a brief explanation, it could have helped the reviewer realize the clue was actually valid. • Apakah browser anda?
Google Chrome v107
Laporan masa lalu
Thank you for all of the hard work on this game!
Tambah sesuatu untuk laporan ini
- ID meja yang lain / gerakkan ID
- Adakah F5 meyelesaikan masalah ity?
- Adapah masalah itu berlaku beberapa kali? Selalu? Sekali-sekala?
- Sekiranya anda ada screenshot bug ini (amalan yang baik), anda boleh gunakan Imgur.com untuk muatnaik dan copy/paste pautan itu di sini.
