If you just double click when entering a room you have absolutely zero right to complain about it, since it was your decision to join that kind of room.

As you will see, i addressed the issue of people playing suring working hours above.

Each to their own

like i said, i'm not a robot. didn't you read that bit?

Hmmm, I must have accidentally set my temporal-adjustment-return-trip dial to 2006.



My view on this thread overall is that everybody is different. Those that set for 90 secs play people who also want 90 sec games, for whatever reason.

What's wrong with that? Do we all have to be the same? Why would anybody want to force people to play shorter games when it makes no difference to them?

The 90 sec players simply won't be able to play if you take away the ability to flick screens and play at leisure, so it's not like you'll gain an extra 20 sec game on the list.

And to all those asking why people play at work...work is BORING, and FP gets people through the day. And some of us work for ourselves, so I'm robbing myself blind everytime I play on here



(With special thanks to k3v for stolen pic idea )

Edited at 20:04 Wed 27/06/07 (BST)

I'm enjoying the stroll down memory lane too

I never intimated you may be a robot Phillippe, but i do think if you are capable of checking which game type you're playing, its pretty silly to attempt to suggest you dont notice the time limit.

If, however, you jst want to burst right in and click everything to get a quick game, you have no right to complain if the parameters are not to your liking.

Its like boiling an egg. People who want them hard boiled can wait the full 3 minutes, if you want it soft or raw, its up to you to pay attention and take yours out at the right time.

Edited at 21:42 Wed 27/06/07 (BST)

ah the drivel is non stop, its amazing, welcome back phil.

and martin as you work for yourself you should know that you shouldnt encourage employees to play while working. if you employed someone would you be happy if they did this while you were paying them?

more people use the 90 sec games to waste time than to help themselves

A happy employee is a productive one.

I know i for one can produce more work in an hour while relaxed and motivated than a whole day if frustrated and bogged down.

One only has to look at microsofts working hours strategy and matsush!ta's "boss battering rooms" to see this makes buisness sense.

Funkypool could well be the saviour of many small firms.

However, seriously, if one is concerned about the effect on productivity, surely allowing longer game times would mean even less time allocated by those playing at work and thus help to ease ones conscience.

I'd be happy to play funkypool all day at work, wouldnt get anything done though! so thats that theory of yours out the window spinner. The way to make an employee happy is not to let them play funkypool lmao. Its to do with the way they are treated.

I've found ways to pass time at work since the first day I started, right back to card schools, Wolfenstein and staring out of windows. And did it effect me?

Yes actually, I was rubbish.

Though probably not because I played games at work, because so did my various bosses.

You can take a moral stance, and nobody can disagree with it, but people are people, and employees will always take a few liberties. It's human nature. And I don't think that one pool shot every 90 seconds is going to disrupt the working day too much.

I work long hours at home and get a lot done. Reading the forums and having a few games of pool breaks up the day and doesn't effect my work rate - probably increases it as it helps me to take a step back and think now and then.

Where and when people play online games isn't really the issue though.

The issue is on what possible grounds you can object to players having the freedom to choose their own game times?

And cityfan, I agree with you there are a few players who delay, especially just before a tournament, but that's an issue of unsporting behaviour not the 90 second timer, because it happens on shorter games too.

By just not playing 90 second games, you've already solved the problem raised in this thread.

Ahhhh, the good old days are back.

Where else could you find one person vehemently denying they're a robot while another discusses raw eggs? Only in a spinner-phillipe debate. Excellent stuff

Edited at 11:38 Thu 28/06/07 (BST)

I'm loving it!

Martin your taking the middle ground here and not really having an opinion of your own. You always say i agree but...so you dont agree?

Personally i think cityfan's point included several issues indirectly. 90 seconds is ridiculous, people always bang on about how the game is fun because its quick and easy to play. 90 seconds takes that away. Imagine i'm at home and the only other people on are at work playing 90 second games. What would i do, apart from rip what hair i have left after arguing with spinner, out!

Why not introduce a 'workers 90 second tourny' through the day? sounds great to me, oh no hang on it would be a bye to the final for one lucky player who happened to see his invite cos all the others missed theirs in the alloted time!

Would be good to see a game with two people at work playing each other

Random shot for playerx
Foul hit wrong ball
Random shot for playerz
Foul no ball hit
Random shot for playerx
playerx loses to playerz by a foul on the black

I'm farly sure I gave an opinion:

I totally disagree with removing the 90 second timer, because I believe that users should have freedom of choice.

where did it say that?

and what about everything else i said?

Where? Where? Up there ^

Takes deep breaths...not getting drawn in...said it already.

The rest of it? As far as I can see there's no rest of it worth debating. You seem to be over-complicating, when it just seems simple:

Those that want 90 second games should play them, those that don't...shouldn't.

I must be going blind.

Plus i gave a scenario where i was only one not playing 90 second games, isnt that worth discussing? Or cant you be bothered cos you cant be sarcastic about anything?

Edited at 14:44 Thu 28/06/07 (BST)

??? Why are you getting personal. You really need to keep your temper and stop attacking people. It was that problem that ended these debates last year.

You obviously didn't read my first post properly either because I thought it was clear. If not to you, then fine. I'm not repeating it. For your info, I disagree with your points (and when has there ever been a majority of 90sec games?? There's hardly any).

Edited at 14:56 Thu 28/06/07 (BST)

Post removed by forum moderator

To add to the above I notice that you are now creating account names to carry on making a personal attack too.

You obviously don't know how to debate without resorting to this type of thing. You were trusted to rejoin the forums, but don't seem to have learnt. Your posting is, again, revoked.

Edited at 15:16 Thu 28/06/07 (BST)

Ah no, put it back. Please..... I want to engage him in debate.



I waned to see what he said... Seriously.

In response to this, and your subsequent work-related posts, do you suggest, Mr Phillippe, that Funkypool be taken away from people who are at work?

Regarding the suggestions of removing the 90 sec option, here's what I propose to make Phillipe feel a little less alone. I'll find a 90 sec game, enter it, click the rack button, and complain immediately in the game room to the player about how dare he/she create a game of that length. And then give out about it here.

Seriously though. Playing a 90 sec game that you hadn't intended playing (or a 10 sec game for that matter) is the fault of the player who doesn't check to see what type of game it is. That easy. Just the same way as setting up a ranking game when you intended to create a friendly is your fault. Or forgetting to put spin on the ball. Or texting the wrong woman, not counting your change, breaking the speed limit, etc.