Forum: Event Management System
Feature request: limit request type to what is allowed by role
P
Tom BjörkholmNationality: Sweden
Certifications:
- National Race Officer
- National Umpire
- National Judge
0
I have seen competitors submitting request of the wrong type (due to misunderstanding or lacking competence of the competitor).
For instance a competitor selects "Request for redress by PC" thinking that they request the protest committee to grant them redress.
This causes some confusion and extra work for the protest committee.
Question: What is the recommended way for the protest committee to correct an incorrect request type?
Feature request: With the users authenticated, could we limit the selection of request types to what is allowed by the users role?
If a competitor can only submit "Protest" (or "Protest by boat") and "Request for redress" (or "Request for redress by boat") the confusion would be avoided.
Similarly "Protest by PC" and "Request for redress by PC" could be limited to users with the role "judge".
As officials may help competitors enter protests/requests into the system, I think all officials should be allowed to file as boat.
What do you think of this feature request?
For instance a competitor selects "Request for redress by PC" thinking that they request the protest committee to grant them redress.
This causes some confusion and extra work for the protest committee.
Question: What is the recommended way for the protest committee to correct an incorrect request type?
Feature request: With the users authenticated, could we limit the selection of request types to what is allowed by the users role?
If a competitor can only submit "Protest" (or "Protest by boat") and "Request for redress" (or "Request for redress by boat") the confusion would be avoided.
Similarly "Protest by PC" and "Request for redress by PC" could be limited to users with the role "judge".
As officials may help competitors enter protests/requests into the system, I think all officials should be allowed to file as boat.
What do you think of this feature request?
Comments
[You must be signed in to add a comment]
If the RfR is for a finish position, simply direct it to RC.
For anything else it requires a hearing.
No need for anything else really.
My question was not about type of hearing, or who should handle the hearing. My question was about this web system for event management and about creating correct traceability in this system when a competitor makes a mistake.
Some weeks ago at a regatta competitors had more choices than necessary and made the incorrect choices when filing a request for hearing.
Then the competitor had a web interface like this:
The options and how I understand the meaning are:
My suggestion was to remove the possibility for people who are not registered officials of the event to file requests from PC/RC/TC.
Today I looked at a regatta that is currently in progress, and I see that Paul has already fixed this.
This is a much better interface for a competitor (with less irrelevant options):
Thus the feature request is already fulfilled for new events.
If the new improved user interface will be there also next year, then my question about how to correct a "Request for Redress by PC" filed by a competitor into a "Request for Redress" with maximum traceability becomes irrelevant.