Online Registration for National Tournaments

[jtrsangel]

Was it me or did others also see on the USFA website that online registration would be available in August. If you know anything about this please post. That would be one of the best advances the USFA could make towards brining us uptodate and save money or at least paper.

[fdad]

Please see this thread: Web-Based NAC Registration

To summarize - it doesn't look good.

[dberke]

Please see this thread: Web-Based NAC Registration

To summarize - it doesn't look good.

Maybe it's just me, but I wouldn't have drawn that conclusion from that thread.

Dan

[KD5MDK]

I agree. I was fairly negative in my one post there, because I'm looking for an integrated, do-it-all system for the USFA. That's a long way off, because we haven't even defined the scope of such a project. However, online registration in its own right is a much smaller problem, and amenable to a reasonably quick fix. It might not be ready for the remaining tournaments in 2008, given deadlines and such, but I'm sure it will be available for 2009.

[keith]

I agree. I was fairly negative in my one post there, because I'm looking for an integrated, do-it-all system for the USFA. That's a long way off, because we haven't even defined the scope of such a project. However, online registration in its own right is a much smaller problem, and amenable to a reasonably quick fix. It might not be ready for the remaining tournaments in 2008, given deadlines and such, but I'm sure it will be available for 2009.

Careful. Remember what happened last time someone proposed a stop gap online solution.

[KD5MDK]

I think who proposes it makes a big difference.

[fdad]

Maybe it's just me, but I wouldn't have drawn that conclusion from that thread.

Dan

Until someone can provide an estimated date for when something is expected - it doesn't look good to me. It certainly does not look as good now as it did two months ago when the estimated date was August.

[keith]

I think who proposes it makes a big difference.

oh I suppose I agree.

Just can't help looking forward to the announcement, and cheer leading, when the new leadership announces the implementation of active

[jtrsangel]

Personally I'm pulling for the the slightly tweeked yet awsome ASKFRED to be utilized. Not because Pete is cool, but ASK FRED seems like a good way for the USFA to save money and time. Alright it is because Pete is cool.

[jjefferies]

I agree. I was fairly negative in my one post there, because I'm looking for an integrated, do-it-all system for the USFA. That's a long way off, because we haven't even defined the scope of such a project.

Every software project that I've been on and that's quite a few that tried to build a do-it-all system FAILED. Experiences are many but come down to a simple core reasons, definition, agreements, resolution to continue. By time you define it, it's out of date. By time you get agreements/buy-ins the project is out of date and delayed. By time it's defined, agreed upon, redefined and further agreed upon it has morphed from the original and you lose the resolution to continue.

However, online registration in its own right is a much smaller problem, and amenable to a reasonably quick fix. It might not be ready for the remaining tournaments in 2008, given deadlines and such, but I'm sure it will be available for 2009.

If you are going to succeed you do one simple, small thing but in such a way that it can be added to, scaled, etc. This is the way successful OS'es are built. See Linux as a good example. Read "The Mythical Man Month" for an example of failure by design (note failures are not necessarily all or nothing).

In my estimation the USFA is not competent to design or even specify the design. I believe it is competent to specify requirements particularly minimum requirements. And I would argue to buy the best available and run with it for a couple of years until you have the experience to ask for something better. AskFred is probably - though I haven't been doing any marketing research - the best system tailored to fencing and one would expect that it would be the most sensible choice.

But I've been assured for the past 3 or 4 years that the USFA would have on-line registration just next year. So pardon my skepticism. I keep switching my opinion between the USFA leadership is just too incompetent to understand that the membership wants this to do what is necessary to conspiracy theories that luddites are in key places and are refusing to accept computers much less online services.

[dberke]

Every software project that I've been on and that's quite a few that tried to build a do-it-all system FAILED. Experiences are many but come down to a simple core reasons, definition, agreements, resolution to continue. By time you define it, it's out of date. By time you get agreements/buy-ins the project is out of date and delayed. By time it's defined, agreed upon, redefined and further agreed upon it has morphed from the original and you lose the resolution to continue.

If you are going to succeed you do one simple, small thing but in such a way that it can be added to, scaled, etc. This is the way successful OS'es are built. See Linux as a good example. Read "The Mythical Man Month" for an example of failure by design (note failures are not necessarily all or nothing).

I think what you describe is what KD5MDK was referring to. I don't think he meant the whole system would be buit in one fell swoop, but rather would be built as an incremental integration of compatible systems.

In my estimation the USFA is not competent to design or even specify the design. I believe it is competent to specify requirements particularly minimum requirements. And I would argue to buy the best available and run with it for a couple of years until you have the experience to ask for something better. AskFred is probably - though I haven't been doing any marketing research - the best system tailored to fencing and one would expect that it would be the most sensible choice.

Correct, the USFA shouldn't specify the design. Leave that to experts.

This is a good start:
http://usfanominees.com/wp-content/u...chproposal.pdf

But I've been assured for the past 3 or 4 years that the USFA would have on-line registration just next year. So pardon my skepticism. I keep switching my opinion between the USFA leadership is just too incompetent to understand that the membership wants this to do what is necessary to conspiracy theories that luddites are in key places and are refusing to accept computers much less online services.

(Emphasis mine)

That's the main reason. Thankfully, that has already begun to change.

Dan