121 replies to this topic

[Kato]

People

The race information thread is now being choked with people griping about the entry process.  So as not to cheese off an already overworked race director, please put your gripes, suggestions, and allegations about the entry process into this thread, and not the other.

I'll start the ball rolling.  It seems there is no great amount of server capacity for the mad scramble - even though it is "only" 1300 people at once.  There is *no way* I could beta test this.  Some system that takes away the lottery of a lucky connection / coincidence should be investigated.  I'm not saying Colin's previous arguments have no merit, but they don't seem to hold up in the face of the complaints about the registration process.

A transparent lottery with equal chance for every applicant would seem fairer than the current lottery of server responsiveness, nervous applicants, and queues being cut off by pulling a plug.

Edited by Kato, 03 December 2011 - 04:25 PM.

[chops]

Not very busy here Kato, must be a lot of happy folk?

[arrtgrrl]

Ok i have a question .. but just for my own knowledge.. not complaining.. but to work out what i did wrong for next year i kept hitting refresh from 8:55 got in at 9:00am wrote my email address in then let the screen countdown and kept putting my address in when prompted.. othe people are syaing they pressed refresh.. i thought we were not supposed to do that otherwise we were put to the end of the cue.. but was i being put to the start of the queue every time i reentered my address?.. maybe i need to have more than one computer next year to try..
Not complaining just asking for tips :-)
Happy to know im in 5th on the waitlist so thanks for letting me know Colin

Naomi

[Unlikelyrunner]

Naomi,  if you are 5th on the waitlist I would be out there training.  I will predict you will get in quite easily.

[arrtgrrl]

thanks yup im not too worried.. just wondering what i did wrong.. if anything.. or just luck of the draw.. just for next year in case i dont get so high up next time.. wouldnt have bothered but saw this thread and thought what the hell :-)
I appreciate having this thread so thanks

Naomi

[Notamidlifecrisis]

I too entered my email address in then let the screen countdown and kept putting my address in when prompted.   That happened a couple of times, and I never hit refresh.

I guess I'm one of the lucky ones (I got in), so I assume that reentering my email address didn't put me to the end of the queue.

[Pasty]

Kato,
I suggest that you alter the title of this thread to "issues" or "anomalies" instead of "gripes".
You may get more people providing their experiences that way.

[Nickelass]

Kato, on 03 December 2011 - 12:24 PM, said:

I'll start the ball rolling.  It seems there is no great amount of server capacity for the mad scramble - even though it is "only" 1300 people at once.  There is *no way* I could beta test this.  

If you need help load testing, I can easily load test this many simultaneous connections for you and also include a script to test logging in etc.  Maybe something to bear in mind for another year?

[otisr]

I had absolutely no problems getting in.  Found the entry process very easy, was on at about 09:00:01 and was out by 09:03 including ccard authorisation.  I even went back in again to see how busy it was and found myself ready to register again.  Thought that was too easy.  

Credit to the system.  Much easier here than getting into Hardrock from what i have read.

[runhard]

I logged in and then in counted down and froze!  Thought I was gone for all money.  Then eventually with the help of others managed to get through.  Did anyone elses stop counting down and stop on the blue screen at zero?   I did go back and try again a few times.  Im in but am still recovering!!!!!  

[fhorn]

Yep similar experience Runhard...had just been for an 18 km run timed to be back at 8:55 but reckon I used up more energy/adrenaline between 9 and 9:05 than in the run...still was worth it!

Edited by fhorn, 03 December 2011 - 06:04 PM.

[ScamBullant]

If this can be tabulated as a collection of data then Im happy to contribute for future reference alone. I too hit the frozen blue screen post entering my email address and hitting the continue button. I also know 1 more in the same situation (along with a number who were successful). All beginning from 9:00am.

Again only contributing to help in the collection of data. Think I might sign up to help with the race on the day, hope others who missed out consider doing the same.

[Supersam1979]

I have not run this previously, so at some encouragement from friends, I had a go from exactly 9am this morning right through till it sold out. 3 friends who wanted to get in managed to (which I am really happy about), yet I missed out after being booted out of the system 5 times while logging my email.

I am on the wait list, but not too fussed. Hold no malice to Colin or any of the other organisers whatsoever and think that anyone who wants to have a go should just grow up - this is life folks - sometimes we get what we want and sometimes not. Personally I would much rather see my spot going to a crack hot runner than just a weekend warrior like me as this helps to lift credibility of of the event.

Anyways I shall help my mates to train and if any thing else I shall be there to be support donkey on the day for them. Onwards and upwards - so much good out there to look forward to.

[Dazza]

arrtgrrl, on 03 December 2011 - 01:02 PM, said:

Ok i have a question .. but just for my own knowledge.. not complaining.. but to work out what i did wrong for next year i kept hitting refresh from 8:55 got in at 9:00am wrote my email address in then let the screen countdown and kept putting my address in when prompted.. othe people are syaing they pressed refresh.. i thought we were not supposed to do that otherwise we were put to the end of the cue.. but was i being put to the start of the queue every time i reentered my address?.. maybe i need to have more than one computer next year to try..
Not complaining just asking for tips :-)
Happy to know im in 5th on the waitlist so thanks for letting me know Colin

Naomi

Sounds exactly like what happened to me.  Kept my fingure off the refresh button,  Stress levels got higher each time I had to re-enter email address.  Rang home  a while back and it sounds like i'm in.  My questions are
(a) whether everytime I re-entered my email address was I retained in the cue or was I bumped back to the end of the cue.  I'm assuming that I was retained but given the experiance of other maybe this wasn't so
( if people were trying to enter using multiple computers that may have led to increased overload of the system compounding issues that many people had entering (that is not meant as a critiism of anyone)

[Shredder1]

Dazza, on 03 December 2011 - 06:59 PM, said:

Sounds exactly like what happened to me.  Kept my fingure off the refresh button,  Stress levels got higher each time I had to re-enter email address.  Rang home  a while back and it sounds like i'm in.  My questions are
(a) whether everytime I re-entered my email address was I retained in the cue or was I bumped back to the end of the cue.  I'm assuming that I was retained but given the experiance of other maybe this wasn't so
( if people were trying to enter using multiple computers that may have led to increased overload of the system compounding issues that many people had entering (that is not meant as a critiism of anyone)

That's exactly what happened to me. Stress levels increased each time I entered my email until it said" event full do want to enter waitlist"? Managed to sneak in as one of the lucky 36 afterwards...like Dazza I was paranoid about hitting the refresh button which may have been a mistake in hindsight...
Anyway no harm done and it was an entertaining and exciting day yesterday!

[haza]

I like an unquantified number had our dreams dashed by something out of control-in my case logged on at 9 by 9:04 prompted to enter my e-mail address and then prompted by the next blue screen to "please wait".Well wait we did.And waited.And waited...trusting in the new system which ironically was designed you would think to make the system so much better.And like others I dared not log in again as we were advised this may cause "conflict" issues.And like others my screen too froze on the counterdown,remaining at zero.But still we put our faith in the new system and waited somemore,After about an hour waitiing went to another computer to discover that it was  all over red rover.Like many I too wish to know what I or where the system erred.Like many I have many mixed emotions-ranging from "end of the world" feelings having qualified,planned and dreamed ahead,thinking how easy it would now be with only 2 "streams" that morning(one "stream" already have been opened a few days earlier).I thought it was going to be a piece of cake(just goes to show never ever take anything for granted in this world);then I oscillate to the other extreme-get a life man,get over it,move on bla bla bla.
Sadly,I feel I will never put myself in this position again while the system is the way it is.Most other entry procedures for running events are far more humane.And even if you were regarded as the best event in the world-and fortunatley I've done a number of 6 foot treks-I'd rather enter the number 2 or 3 event without the trauma your process entails.And trauma is putting it both mildly and politely.
But  for all  those who got through effortlessly in record time.Good luck and realise jut how lucky you were(lucky being the operative word).
As they say in the cartoons"That's all folks".What a stuff up!

[Colin]

I have stayed out of this thread because I want people to quote their experiences and I will relay them to ActiveNet to find out the background to them.

But....

haza, on 04 December 2011 - 12:58 PM, said:

I like an unquantified number had our dreams dashed ...

Unquantified, but less than 20% of those that tried during the morning. (educated guess)

haza, on 04 December 2011 - 12:58 PM, said:

Sadly,I feel I will never put myself in this position again while the system is the way it is.Most other entry procedures for running events are far more humane.

What sort of system would be more humane when we are limited in entries -850- and the number of people who want to do it rise each year? We are always going to have more and more trying to get less and less spots. Next year the number who qualify for guarantee will either increase or some of those will be vying for general veteran spots.
A lottery on other hand gives even less chance with your fate decided by lucky draw, and how would that be transparent etc.

Is NF100 more humane? $330 may slow down entries and you can decide if you still want one, but is that the price we should pay to have less angst and more 'humane' system?? Tell me. If the majority say yes, we do it.

There might be solutions, but perhaps use your experiences to suggest how we can implement them. I have already indicated how we can get more entries. No one is making any move or suggestion on helping to make it a done deal.

By all means give us your personal anomalies and glitches, but make  some suggestion as to why that may have happenned and how to address it.

haza, on 04 December 2011 - 12:58 PM, said:

As they say in the cartoons"That's all folks".What a stuff up!

869 people(plus 248 guarantees) are not saying that.

Edited by Colin, 04 December 2011 - 01:14 PM.

[Supersam1979]

Person A to Sam on Friday night - 'I am running 6 foot next year'.

Sam to person A - 'What if you don't make it through the entry system?'

Person A - 'I am running 6 foot in 2012'.

Sam - 'You don't get it - you need to first get in through the entry system'.

Person A - 'I am running 6 foot in 2012..'. Blah blah blah - like talking to a brick wall really.

One last time for those whinging about fairness etc -
1. It is a set process that you agree to much like anything in life - there has to be process and rules to everything.
2. We DID NOT MAKE IT IN
3. If you have qualified once you can qualify again in future years.
4. The qualification process is pretty easy really.
5. A way of ensuring less interest could be to make it harder to qualify (ala Boston - no run under 3.05 etc, no qualify 6 foot).
6. WE DID NOT MAKE IT IN..
7. Numbers are not controlled by organisers, rather by the parks and forestry lot for obvious reasons. It would be great to have 3000 doing it like other marathons, but this is not possible.
8. Suck it up princess.
9. one last time.... WE DID NOT MAKE IT IN!!!

[Kato]

Colin, on 04 December 2011 - 01:13 PM, said:

Unquantified, but less than 20% of those that tried during the morning. (educated guess)



What sort of system would be more humane when we are limited in entries -850- and the number of people who want to do it rise each year? We are always going to have more and more trying to get less and less spots. Next year the number who qualify for guarantee will either increase or some of those will be vying for general veteran spots.
A lottery on other hand gives even less chance with your fate decided by lucky draw, and how would that be transparent etc.

Is NF100 more humane? $330 may slow down entries and you can decide if you still want one, but is that the price we should pay to have less angst and more 'humane' system?? Tell me. If the majority say yes, we do it.

There might be solutions, but perhaps use your experiences to suggest how we can implement them. I have already indicated how we can get more entries. No one is making any move or suggestion on helping to make it a done deal.

By all means give us your personal anomalies and glitches, but make  some suggestion as to why that may have happenned and how to address it.


869 people(plus 248 guarantees) are not saying that.

Colin
I thought that by offering to beta test the registration process this year it would help the registration process to NOT be a lottery with a bias towards those people with a certain type of browser, certain ISP etc.  I have a feeling I was wrong, as the system certainly seems to have 'favoured' some entrants over others.
A case in point.  Action, in his honesty, has related to posting novice entries for two friends on line, and then one more for a friend who dictated their entry details to him.  How the hell is that fair - he entered THREE TIMES while others fail to enter once, despite following all the blather sent out in the emails.  Basically, next year people, send your entry to Action and he'll sort it out?
There is still a lottery being conducted.  That you can't see it doesn't mean it isn't happening.  And the tickets to enter are inscrutable to us, and may remain so, while you are asking the developers Activenet (who have a conflict of interest about giving a straight answer).

You didn't experience a problem, so there can't be a problem there - that seems to be your repeated response.  Pastyboy has a problem, but obviously has a hidden agenda, so there must be something wrong with the way he's operating the system.  There must be, because entrant "X" has entered first cab off the rank for three years in succession.  What a crock of shit - even blind Freddy can see that the system seems to be favouring some entrants over others.  As I said - why it is, we can't yet determine.  So, how does that give a potential entrant control over their fate?

And because there were 870 or so out of 1300 who have no complaints there can't be a problem.  Look around, and really read the posts of some of those who got in  - even among those who were successful, there were a hell of a lot who were less than happy with the process.

Oh, and  870 out of 1300 is a lot closer to 67% than 80%, so it's more like 33% (one person in THREE) MIGHT be saying it's a stuff up, if the entry process treated them as shabbily as, say, Pastyboy.

[walshy2]

runhard, on 03 December 2011 - 05:59 PM, said:

I logged in and then in counted down and froze!  Thought I was gone for all money.  Then eventually with the help of others managed to get through.  Did anyone elses stop counting down and stop on the blue screen at zero?   I did go back and try again a few times.  Im in but am still recovering!!!!!  

Mine never froze, but the blue screen kept counting down, then every 2 minutes or so it would pop up the 1st screen where you enter your email address then start counting down again etc

Finally got through to register at around 9:09 - 9:10

[Colin]

Kato, on 04 December 2011 - 06:07 PM, said:

You didn't experience a problem, so there can't be a problem there - that seems to be your repeated response.  Pastyboy has a problem, but obviously has a hidden agenda, so there must be something wrong with the way he's operating the system.  There must be, because entrant "X" has entered first cab off the rank for three years in succession.  What a crock of shit - even blind Freddy can see that the system seems to be favouring some entrants over others.  As I said - why it is, we can't yet determine.  So, how does that give a potential entrant control over their fate?
////
Oh, and  870 out of 1300 is a lot closer to 67% than 80%, so it's more like 33% (one person in THREE) MIGHT be saying it's a stuff up, if the entry process treated them as shabbily as, say, Pastyboy.

Kato,

I thought you started this thread for people to list problems unemotionally so that I can take it further. That is why I have only made one response.
I encourage others to do what your original intent was with the thread.

I DID NOT say there was no problem because I did not have a problem. I just relayed mine and many others experience. I told pastyboy that "I admit I don't know what his problem"

We don't know whether the people Action registered for had browser problems, you are stabbing in the dark - and doesn't that tell you a lot that he could do that on two devices? As far as we know all known browsers were successfully used by several different entrants. There is no browser that had a common problem.

BTW...you were not a beta tester. ActiveNet have already tested that the forms they build work on all available browsers. This is their business and they won't be number 1 if not.
You offered to test if it worked on all browsers you could find after complaining that it didn't last year. You reported no situations where it didn't

I had several others test the functionality for our purposes, ease of use , proper questions etc. They used whatever browsers they run and reported no issues.

I don't bat for Active and Dave can tell you that I do not give them slack and actually don't even deal with their local rep. However I am not going to respond straight off by slagging Activenet when I do not have the facts. We all know what was related last year and what actually was time stamped.

Let's wait and get some facts first from both sides and then start investigating and apportioning blame.

As for the 1300 vs 870, I thought we were all saying earlier that people had 'several logons', so lets be consistent here and take that into account. My email account doesn't tell me that we have the big numbers complaining that you suggest.
edit:
BTW, lets think like logical IT guys (not that I am one). The ratio 67%, 80% or even 30% is meaningless because we gave away all the spots we had , if we had 1300 then it would be 100%.

Let's just simply accept that >686 logged on and that 686 got successful entries within a couple of minutes. If you can think of a way that more than 686 people could get the 686 spots I am all ears.

And if you really had a lottery then it would be 686 out of 2000 or 3000 or however many registered.

cheers and lets keep the anomalies coming.

ps..

I just want to give an example of 'jumping to conclusions' wasting my time.

We got a 'complaint' that the system 'rejected' macquarie email addresses. We referred this to ActiveNet.
I got further emails from the two people and investigated. Checked waitlist then thought, check the entries and found that both actually got entries, not only that one registered a second person and the other got a second person on waitlist. Plus email responses back and forth 15min wasted on a wild goose chase by jumping to conclusions.

Let's relax and wait to see where problems were.

Edited by Colin, 04 December 2011 - 07:39 PM.

[Kato]

I never said Action registered for people who had problems.  I said Action managed to register three times while other people managed to enter not at all.  Maybe the login or registration process favours some ISPs, or locales, or in the end some browsers. I can't test the "fairness" of the registration process manually.  When you're dealing with a vendor, they have an agenda to make noises that will keep you buying from them. Only an idiot would suggest otherwise.

Your personal experience might be anomalous - we can't tell.  But the personal experience of someone who has no problem only counts as much as the experience of someone who did have a problem, no more.  Obviously, all those who tried to enter, whether successfully or otherwise, haven't related their experiences.

Quote

As for the 1300 vs 870, I thought we were all saying earlier that people  had 'several logons', so lets be consistent here and take that into  account. My email account doesn't tell me that we have the big numbers  complaining that you suggest.

I feel that any number of complaints justify an investigation into how the system can be made fairer.

[bbf]

This is not a gripe or complaint... only offering a query you can ask ActiveNet.

Now Most people that had the erroneous re-enter email address probably, quite possibly could have been at the back of the Queue... As you have stated elsewhere colin, active used a time-stamp based cookie, from first entry of email address.

My Theory has to do with those who were able to enter multiple times.

Did this system, actually not override this cookie after their first entry? E.G the time stamp from their initial entry was still stored on their machine, and actually allowed them to enter again and again - thus for their second and third entries they were essentially queue jumpers. If this indeed did happen (Just an observation based on my past experience creating sites that used cookies) it would not have affected that many people (how many people entered multiples?) - but would have cost those at the top of the waitlist their spot.

I had no problems personally . I was quick enough to be part of the speedy people who didn't have to queue and went straight into the entry system, so it worked a treat for me, just proposing a possible flaw on the creator of the systems part.

[Colin]

Kato, on 04 December 2011 - 07:37 PM, said:

I feel that any number of complaints justify an investigation into how the system can be made fairer.

Yes. I have said I will, and already am, passing on all these 'anomalies'. But until we have more background, lets hold our fire about the system being 'unfair' or failing.

Once again, we had 650 spots, we ended up giving 686. We didn't have more than that to give. If you can find a system like this, other than a lottery out of thousands, which will be fairer to those 686 people then fire away.

If there were only 686 people logging on, including pastyboy and sacmbullant, then everybody would have got entries. As it is we have more than 686 people trying so we will always have x-686 people not getting in and some will find that unfair.

bbf, on 04 December 2011 - 07:51 PM, said:

Now Most people that had the erroneous re-enter email address probably, quite possibly could have been at the back of the Queue... As you have stated elsewhere colin, active used a time-stamp based cookie, from first entry of email address.

No. The people that got onto the first waitlist spots were the first people in order of queue that were behind the 325th person to log-on.
At that stage there were less than 200 that had completed check-out (I don't know the number). According to Activenet the system then looked at completed entries being less than 325 and gave 325-[checked out number] an offer. Many of those people then went straight in behind the 325 (still in queue order more or less ie they didn't bypass people in 325, but perhaps people within waitlist).
However this is not an issue that affected entrants- they would have got spots eventually, but a problem for us. We had to stop it because the total could have been 325 + [waitlist offers].
Active's explanation doesn't cover why it went over 325 though.

cheers

Edited by Colin, 04 December 2011 - 08:27 PM.

[Dave]

Just saw this thread as I've been off busy doing real life stuff since Sat am.

Just like Colin, I am no apologist for ActiveNet, the system/process was not perfect but I do truly believe it worked better than last year, and the email inbox for 6ft reflects this. Truly happy to try and understand people's various challenges and provide that feedback to Active Net. Make no mistake the problems with the waitlist falls squarely at their feet.

I am not just interested in the various problems people experienced, yes this might help. But even more, if there are people out there who want to provide input, give suggestions/examples as to more successful processes that try to squeeze 1300 odd people into 650 spots (without heading down a full on lottery style approach). We've seen what Active can do, I'm not hearing anyone talk about anything about xyz solution who support other races with similar demand for spots within a 15 minute window. Any alternative option has to be somewhat commercial in nature with good references/examples. So not really interested in someone's Uncle who knows a bit of coding and could bang something together, maybe...

Finally, please play the ball and not the man, every single person involved in the organisation of 6ft is a volunteer. Some devote huge amounts of personal time to try and not just run the race but improve it and make it more successful. You may not like all of the decisions or processes, but I have never seen any sort of queue of applicants ready to stand up and make a difference.....

[Mick]

bbf, on 04 December 2011 - 07:51 PM, said:

Now Most people that had the erroneous re-enter email address probably, quite possibly could have been at the back of the Queue... As you have stated elsewhere colin, active used a time-stamp based cookie, from first entry of email address.

Here is my experience if it helps improve the process for next time (I found it a bit annoying to hae to enter my email address 5 times, each time I was losing hope that I would gain a spot, but I wasn't hugely stressed like some).

Win7, IE8, business Telstra Internet connection, one computer, no use of refresh.

I elected to hit enter at 9:00:10. I got the 15-0 countdown a few times and then entered my email address at 9:02 and hit continue, I then received a 15-0 count down numerous times and was prompted to enter my email address again at 9:03, I again received the 15-0 countdown numerous times, and the process repeated at 9:07, 9:09, and 9:11. This time it progressed to the details screen where trusting the information we were provided I took my time, booked a bus, donated $20, bought a cap, etc.

I've looked at my cookies and I have one for @active.com at 9:02am, and regonline.activeglobal.com/ at 9:17am.

It would be interesting to know where I was in the queue at this 9:02 to 9:11 period. Was my 9:02 time being considered or was I going to the back.

BTW Thanks to everyone who donates their time to make this race possible.

[john stevens]

Would it have helped to split the entry times for Novices and Veterans, to a few hours apart?  Is that a possibility with the Active people/does it cost more or whatever?

[Charlatan]

Hi, in the hope this info might be somehow useful to improving the process ....

I used Safari, with only one window open and was prompted to input my email almost right on 9am (I was hitting refresh on the icon until it opened, so not sure I could have been any earlier).  I was then taken to the 'please wait' screen where the timer counted from 15 to zero and stayed there until about 9.25.  When I saw people on coolrunning were hitting refresh at this screen, I did the same and was given a waitlist.  

I also tried to register via an Android phone on the Virgin network. By that stage it was only waitlist, but it would not recognise a gmail address as valid.

Have a good run all.

[undercover brother]

Dave, on 04 December 2011 - 09:39 PM, said:

I'm not hearing anyone talk about anything about xyz solution who support other races with similar demand for spots within a 15 minute window.

what on-line entry system does kepler use?

[Brick]

undercover brother, on 05 December 2011 - 08:39 AM, said:

what on-line entry system does kepler use?

How many people miss out on Kepler every year?

[Spud]

Brick, that's irrelevant. No system will guarantee everyone getting a spot.
It's about how well they work...

[Brick]

Spud, on 05 December 2011 - 08:47 AM, said:

Brick, that's irrelevant. No system will guarantee everyone getting a spot.
It's about how well they work...

How do you know how well it works?
Does Kelper have a forum that people can comment before during and after entries?

[Supersam1979]

Acceptance seems to be a hard thing for some.

Any decent runner who runs regularly and is on the waitlist should be able to complete this even with a short amount of notice.

I intend to be out there helping my mates on the day. Why not consider volunteering if you still want to be part of the event? There seem to be a significant amount of whingers in the running community who think that the only thing that counts is them running - they are good at whinging, but not so good at actually standing out there and helping at an event...

One last time now and then I am walking away from this one - 'WE DID NOT MAKE IT IN. Time to move on to other things folks.

[Spud]

Brick, on 05 December 2011 - 08:57 AM, said:

How do you know how well it works?
Does Kelper have a forum that people can comment before during and after entries?

I am not sure how well it works, that's the question, what system do they use and how well does it work for them?

[Financeman]

In order to aid next year only my experience was similar to Mick (#26 thread).. I did get a spot after about 4 or 5 false starts as described above by Mick - I am unsure if false start is the correct wording but you get the picture..

I was not stressed by the whole thing thinking I was likely to miss out by the time I was accepeted - there are many great events on all year round. I have no idea if what I did at 09:00:01 until I paid for the event helped or hindered my chances. I didn't hit refresh. (This is just feedback on my experience which when reading comment #26 seemed like it was me!)

I run the same setup to Mick except I was on Telstra mobile broadband (the little blue stick called Elite).. I am not a tech or expert on these things and entered only by typing info as it was requested.

Cheers to the organisers. I am a fortunate and lucky entrant. Nothing to do with the system.. It's a great and popular event where not everyone will get in.. Glad to be in when next year I might not..

[Mick]

Brick, on 05 December 2011 - 08:57 AM, said:

How do you know how well it works?

Kepler was rubbish two years ago when SlowManiac and I were trying to register.

Page cannot be displayed for over 5 minutes after advertised time, refreshing maddly, texting mates to see if they were having the same problems, hugely annoying.

[SixFootTrackMarathon]

Mick, on 05 December 2011 - 07:37 AM, said:

It would be interesting to know where I was in the queue at this 9:02 to 9:11 period. Was my 9:02 time being considered or was I going to the back.

Thanks Mick. This is the kind of info we need rather than finger pointing.

Your time stamp is 9:11am.

I will press ActiveNet to find out if others logging on after 9:02am got an earlier time stamp

Spud, on 05 December 2011 - 08:47 AM, said:

No system will guarantee everyone getting a spot.
It's about how well they work...

I just want to re-iterate again. So far we have experiences of those that missed out , and we were always going to have many missing out.

But we do not have any evidence yet that there was a common reason for it (browser etc) and why it appears that some waited longer than others.
ActiveNet used a throttle on the system, and let's allow them to explain how that throttle worked.

It is no use comparing one system vs another, when we don't know if anything went wrong in the first case.

As a general comment about such things let me give two different industry examples:

ISP's. They do not send a Telstra guy straight to the line in your street, the nearest pit or post or the exchange when you say "my internet is not working", because their statistics say that 'almost all' issues to call centre lie between computer (user) and their own first socket.

My industry: I distribute analytical laboratory instruments, and despite the hardware that can go wrong, 90% of problems reported have nothing to do with the hardware, but the way very educated users use the system , understanding of chemistry involved or network issues. Which is why we do not employ 'electrically minded' service engineers but applications chemists with good troubleshooting ability.

Last year's complaints about incomplete entries had no basis in the end after time wasting investigation.

So until we have clarity on what the system was supposed to do - 3hrs behind in Singapore and Sunday in USA), lets stick to listing those anomalies like Mick has done rather than speculate.

It is irrelevant to ask what Kepler uses when we firstly don't no whether the system was unfair to people and we don't know the different demand vs availability on the day.

cheers

[BigDaddyChad]

Reposting feedback I posted on SixFoot info thread, apologies for clogging that thread.

Colin, on 04 December 2011 - 12:10 PM, said:

OK. The incomplete registrant reports are only 15 novices and 24 vets. Some of those ended up as wait listers (I haven't checked if any actually entered).
Anyone who really entered and "was allowed to continue" and then aborted/was booted out will be on this list. I am on both lists as I should be- I logged in then reversed out. I was also allowed to come straight back to the email entry log on page where I was before I closed browsers- so it kept me there.
I don't see your email or scambullant's on that list...so no, you hadn't "been logged on".

I'd be very interested to know if my email address made it onto this incomplete registrants list. Given my experience was identical to others (frozen out after entering my email address, twice, after refreshing madly from 9:00:01) I'd suggest that if it isn't on this list, there is a bug in Active's software prior to them collecting email addresses. If my email address is on that list, the problem meant I had no way of progressing my entry (a bug in the process of allowing the entry to be completed).

If Active are interested, I was attempting to enter using Safari on iOS

[SixFootTrackMarathon]

Mate,

I have no idea who bigdaddychad is.

[BigDaddyChad]

SixFootTrackMarathon, on 05 December 2011 - 09:46 AM, said:

Mate,

I have no idea who bigdaddychad is.

Thanks Colin, I'll email the sixfoot email address with my email.

[Rico]

But re this thread, I think it is reasonable to look at Kepler since they are doing exactly the same thing in terms of more aspirants than places with an online entry system attempting to reward people on a first in basis.  That said, my one experience with it wasn't very impressive.

[SixFootTrackMarathon]

Rico, on 05 December 2011 - 10:06 AM, said:

Edit: not the thread for questions about shirt sizing?

The size chart is on the entry page.

When I reset it to "update" I will email all.

PS

This is where people list anomalies. I cannot investigate personal cases from you especially if I don't know who you are.

So far the biggest 'complainer' of the process since Sat am, has not yet emailed us with his specific details. Makes you wonder.

edit:

Rico, on 05 December 2011 - 10:12 AM, said:

But re this thread, I think it is reasonable to look at Kepler since they are doing exactly the same thing in terms of more aspirants than places with an online entry system attempting to reward people on a first in basis.  That said, my one experience with it wasn't very impressive.

Don't agree because we only have anecdotes so far and don't know what actually happenned. So what are we supposed to compare.
"hey Kepler had no issues, lets use that system"?? ??
We have no idea whether our system failed and whether the same procedure was followed there, same throttle, same demand vs slots etc etc.

Its meaningless and illogical at this point.

Edited by SixFootTrackMarathon, 05 December 2011 - 10:17 AM.

[notfromhere]

I just thought i would give my opinion as i worked for Active for a number of years back in the U.S

Something going wrong with their entry systems is the normal, just ask WTC or any other small or large organisation that they cater for.

I'm sure Active will have the excuses and reasons for why this or that didnt work and they will promise it wont happen again or "its development to get worked on" blah blah.....

The bottom line is Active is about growth- thats all! they dont care about much else and especially the little guys, and i have witnessed this first hand. I could imagine it even being worse here as most of Active's business comes from back in the states.  The people that work on the frontline genuinely do care but the management, both middle and senior dont. They are more interested in getting there new job tittle and beating their chest about how good they and both Active are.

If i was a smaller event i would look at getting a local firm to do your reg as there maybe some teething problems but at least you will genuine answers and not get strung along.

On a side note I also believe that Actives aquisition of Event Director will do nothing to improve services and if it was a more "mainstream" company im sure the ACCC wouldnt mind having a look into it.

Edited by notfromhere, 05 December 2011 - 10:20 AM.

[SixFootTrackMarathon]

notfromhere, on 05 December 2011 - 10:14 AM, said:

If i was a smaller event i would look at getting a local firm to do your reg as there maybe some teething problems but at least you will genuine answers and not get strung along.

Thanks for your input, but at this point in time we are not "being strung along". It is 8am in Singapore and Sunday in USA and I am still compiling the email to them, and I am a lot more cynical than you think...I don't "get strung along" by any vendor.

Last week I had yet another Telstra line issue causing internet problems. iiNets hands are tied in troubleshooting and getting Telstra to respond, but I got them to lodge it as a 'phone issue', Telstra came and made another temporary fix, I got the technician to request a total line replacement - with support of neighbours- and I got a free wireless broadband (1Gb/month) from iiNet for my troubles, plus a free new modem.
I don't get "strung along".

But re ActiveNet, I wonder why they would bother with us. They 'only' get 4.5% (inc CC fees) which is max $6,750 not even a decent salary, yet spend over a month on our job with numerous updates and they had two people on deck in Singapore Sat morning, plus a dev team responding ex USA.
I wouldn't be doing it.

Edited by SixFootTrackMarathon, 05 December 2011 - 10:25 AM.

[notfromhere]

SixFootTrackMarathon, on 05 December 2011 - 10:23 AM, said:

Thanks for your input, but at this point in time we are not "being strung along". It is 8am in Singapore and Sunday in USA and I am still compiling the email to them, and I am a lot more cynical than you think...I don't "get strung along" by any vendor.

Last week I had yet another Telstra line issue causing internet problems. iiNets hands are tied in troubleshooting and getting Telstra to respond, but I got them to lodge it as a 'phone issue', Telstra came and made another temporary fix, I got the technician to request a total line replacement - with support of neighbours- and I got a free wireless broadband (1Gb/month) from iiNet for my troubles, plus a free new modem.
I don't get "strung along"

I don't know you Collin, but i know you do a fantastic job with your event.
I was just giving my opinion, nothing more nothing less.

[haza]

Yeah,seems we are going around in circles.
Our wisdom of the process reminds me of the parabe of the blind sage person feeling part of  the elephant and people asking him for the meaning of the elephant.I guess our views are greatly influenced of what we each felt. Anyhow  think it may be best to wait until more information is provided.
However  I do not wish to be cynical but after re-reading the assurances that we were given in the pre-entry phase with lines like"log on will be as simple as possible","once you have logged on,you are in the queue","there is no need to rush through the system in 30 seconds!","even if you have logged on...you are still queued in order of time stamp.Be patient(sic)";don't think of opening multiple sessions as it may cause "conflict problems" etc.it may be time to take a different tack.
.
Regardless of the outcome of this "enquiry"should not the organization provide a rider for future races along these lines:-

Notwithstanding our best intentions to get the system working perfectly as we have outlined above,it will in all probability fail for reasons which we may or never know precisely and can never guarantee to be fixed;as a consequence there will be entrants missing out when they should not have had had the system worked properly;by entering this "race" you accept the limitations of the system and will not whinge,complain,etc
In other words Caveator Emptor.
(but by all means let us know how you were hard done by so we may attempt to better the system "tomorrow").

[Linno]

I'd like to make a comment as a bit of an interested bystander. I've walked the track a number of times so I know what it's like, but I have no desire whatsoever to run it. I've been a spectator back in the days when entering was much easier.

Also, someone close to me, who already has a few six foots under his belt, was keen to run another next year. He had started a training program, but he too missed out. His comment was, "Oh, well, looks like I'm doing Canberra." And later, he was looking at some other trail runs to use his new trail shoes on.

He's not going to get on here and complain, but it doesn't mean he's not disappointed, and I think a bit annoyed. Running's not about sitting at a computer pushing the right buttons at the right time. It's something done on your feet outside.

I commented on another thread about race entries, that we tend to look for the smaller races that welcome your entry, even on the day. I also said that may be in years to come, when the novelty has worn off for many, some of these races will be wondering where their runners have gone. I think that many will have found that there are other runs to do that don't cause all this angst over entering.

To those who are upset, and I understand how you feel, I'd say there are other runs out there, even a series in the Blue Mountains. Also the track is there everyday. Get some mates together and a bit of support and it can be done at another time.

Now I just hope and pray that entering the City to Surf never comes down to this as I will be calling it quits after over thirty years!

Edited by Linno, 05 December 2011 - 11:47 AM.

[SixFootTrackMarathon]

haza, on 05 December 2011 - 11:17 AM, said:

Regardless of the outcome of this "enquiry"should not the organization provide a rider for future races along these lines:-

Notwithstanding our best intentions to get the system working perfectly as we have outlined above,it will in all probability fail for reasons which we may or never know precisely and can never guarantee to be fixed;as a consequence there will be entrants missing out when they should not have had had the system worked properly;by entering this "race" you accept the limitations of the system and will not whinge,complain,etc
In other words Caveator Emptor.
(but by all means let us know how you were hard done by so we may attempt to better the system "tomorrow").

Lol

But we should also add:

"If the race had no limit, or the limit was equal to the number trying to enter, then you will all get in, so keep trying."

There were no promises that everyone will get a spot or that demand will be less than or equal to supply. I think it should have been obvious that it wasn't the case.

In otherwords, we would not have been blaming the system if there were open ended spots.

Linno, on 05 December 2011 - 11:46 AM, said:

Now I just hope and pray that entering the City to Surf never comes down to this as I will be calling it quits after over thirty years!

Exactly Lynn,

See above. CtS allow 90,000 or more to enter. We only have 850 slots.

Edited by SixFootTrackMarathon, 05 December 2011 - 11:48 AM.

[Rico]

So how about Kilian missing out in the Hardrock lottery ...

[iangallagher16]

i registered fine. no problems. logged in at 8.59 and refreshed my page a few times and i was in.

i dont see what the drama is all about. The race goes like hot cakes.