On Jul 20, 4:55 am, FreeFlight107 wrote:
There were some issues with the data integrety. I hope
that they were able to sort them out. Both pilots were
estatic after landing and had quite a tale of long
blue holes for completion. OLC or not quite a feat
for the day!
Too bad they didn't post to the OLC...
IMHO, that should be a requirement for all record and perhaps even

badge claims.

Tom,
IMHO, I can't see making OLC posting a requirement, but it would be a
great show of Sportsmanship if these kinds of flights were posted

First would be sportsmanship, but eventually it could develop into a
single international standard for managing all flight claims.

It would take a lot of work, but in the end would give all countries
and regions the same set of tools to manage their badge and record
claims.

the next glitch comes with the Tuesday deadline for posting. I
personnaly don't know why such a short time after the weekend is
needed, I'd prefer a 10 day window, and for non-scoring flights a 30
day window. Can someone pass this on to the OLC admins?

The rationale for the Tuesday deadline is to "force" weekend flights,
which are the bulk of the claims, to be posted in a timely fashion.

Perhaps a scoring penalty could be applied to all flight claims...
Your score is multiplied by 1.00 if submitted within 72 hours of the
landing time. Then for the next 30 days, the multiplier is
decremented until it reaches zero. Flights can still be posted, but
they no longer get scored.

While we're at it, I'd like to suggest tothe OLC committee that they settle on
one format, and leave it that way for a very long period. In the last 4
years I've known of OLC they've changed the format, look & feel about
3 times, the last being the worst is terms of user friendlyness.

Remember, the OLC is a "free" service provided by volunteers with some
corporate sponsorship. The software developers don't have the luxury
of hiring focus groups and teams of testers to decide what works and
what doesn't. The first incarnation was likely an attempt to get
something out for people to use and to validate the concept of the
OLC. It was popular, so they proceeded to the next step, which was to
beef it up and add features. That worked as well, but then a whole
set of new ideas came up about usability, competition formats, methods
of viewing or searching for flights, etc... So now we have the
current version, which, after 6-8 months of field testing by us, is
becoming quite stable and usable.

I have found that the developers do accept comments and suggestions,
but as with most "parents" of a product, don't take kindly to pure
criticism. Don't tell them that something is bad. Instead tell them
what changes could make it better. Be specific.

And personally, I think the current version is quite friendly

-Tom