New format for buying tickets

[Toilet Duck]

1 minute ago, The Nal said:

 

Yep. So massively disadvantages people who dont have large group of friends. Or devices. Or know how to use VPNs. 

Yeah, we all agreed not to use VPNs for the sale as it had been suggested that it would flag you as a bot...but when it became clear that the device I had connected to my wifi wasn't going anywhere, but those on 5G were moving more swiftly, I decided to try it and put a few more on the wifi using VPNs. All got unique queue IDs and didn't get flagged as suspicious. Also, I just put another couple of devices on with a straight connection to the wifi...they too got unique queue IDs and none of them got flagged for suspicious activity. So I think a few devices per connection is probably ok if you don't take the p*ss...contrary to the advice on the FAQ.

[Chrisp1986]

49 minutes ago, Nobody Interesting said:

Yes, much fairer

It's only fairer if I am successful on Sunday.

[Pinhead]

21 minutes ago, Toilet Duck said:

Yeah, we all agreed not to use VPNs for the sale as it had been suggested that it would flag you as a bot...but when it became clear that the device I had connected to my wifi wasn't going anywhere, but those on 5G were moving more swiftly, I decided to try it and put a few more on the wifi using VPNs. All got unique queue IDs and didn't get flagged as suspicious. Also, I just put another couple of devices on with a straight connection to the wifi...they too got unique queue IDs and none of them got flagged for suspicious activity. So I think a few devices per connection is probably ok if you don't take the p*ss...contrary to the advice on the FAQ.

They could if they wanted, block all those VPN operators, though they clearly have chosen not to do that yet. In future years this could change as no one really needs to use one to access the system do they?

 

As before, organised groups with multiple gateways to the web have the upper hand. As mentioned above, limiting from 6 to 4 might dissuade some of these though I'm sure many would just escalate their client numbers to compensate.

 

Experience has improved as no more blank screen or unreachable errors. Better for customers - better for Public Relations. Bringing a huge global CDN in has made the operation less hit and miss but has officially reduced it to a simple ballot (albeit where those on big lists with more discreet IP's get to draw more straws).

 

 

[Benito94]

Putting the queuing system to one side, when I got through the website was far more stable than previously. The payment went through without a hitch, it let me click back and forth to check different coach times without the webpage dying and kicking me off.

 

So from that front, once you are in, you are in and it should work.  

 

Its all luck, but I had one tab open on Edge, Chrome and Mozilla (Edge winning the day). Each one had a different ID number. I was also on a work WiFi that goes through a VPN which I checked with the Akamai link prior too. 

[Rose-Colored Boy]

8 minutes ago, Harry Bennett said:

Putting the queuing system to one side, when I got through the website was far more stable than previously. The payment went through without a hitch, it let me click back and forth to check different coach times without the webpage dying and kicking me off.

 

So from that front, once you are in, you are in and it should work.  

 

Its all luck, but I had one tab open on Edge, Chrome and Mozilla (Edge winning the day). Each one had a different ID number. I was also on a work WiFi that goes through a VPN which I checked with the Akamai link prior too. 

We did get an error message on page two (the “here are the details for the registration numbers you’ve put in” one) but we hit back and it worked fine the second time. 

[Ayrshire Chris]

Judgement on the new system reserved until 10am, Sunday morning😊😉

[incident]

50 minutes ago, Scotdy said:

This forum was a good example. A spreadsheet of say 50 groups all trying for eachother that pushed a 'normal' ticket tryer down the pack due to shear volume focusing on specific reg numbers and tech tricks.

 

It's interesting that you think this has gone away.

 

I'd say that - barring last night while people learned and recalibrated - the above will be more true going forward than ever before.

[Rose-Colored Boy]

1 minute ago, incident said:

 

It's interesting that you think this has gone away.

 

I'd say that - barring last night while people learned and recalibrated - the above will be more true going forward than ever before.

Said this on another thread - there’s an obvious way to prevent it. They just need to ask people to enter their registration numbers before joining the queue. That way it’d be physically impossible to have more than one queue open per registration number. 

[incident]

1 minute ago, Rose-Colored Boy said:

Said this on another thread - there’s an obvious way to prevent it. They just need to ask people to enter their registration numbers before joining the queue. That way it’d be physically impossible to have more than one queue open per registration number. 

 

Still ways to game that.

[fraybentos1]

2 minutes ago, Rose-Colored Boy said:

Said this on another thread - there’s an obvious way to prevent it. They just need to ask people to enter their registration numbers before joining the queue. That way it’d be physically impossible to have more than one queue open per registration number. 

People would just register more times with more email addresses no?

[Rose-Colored Boy]

2 minutes ago, incident said:

 

Still ways to game that.

 

2 minutes ago, fraybentos1 said:

People would just register more times with more email addresses no?

Of course - no system will ever be perfect - but it’d cut it down massively. 

[fraybentos1]

3 minutes ago, Rose-Colored Boy said:

 

Of course - no system will ever be perfect - but it’d cut it down massively. 

I am shocked they didn't do that tbh. Surely easy to implement.

 

I don't mind how it is now, it defo seemed more stable and you can still increase your chances by getting family & friends to try for you. Which i think is fair enough.

[uscore]

1 hour ago, Supernintendo Chalmers said:

 

To answer your question, I'd say that fairer means no advantage to anyone, from a physical system point of view. A level playing field. It's out of the festivals hands on the number of devices available to people or organised groups, there's only so much they can do. Maybe to counter that, they need to reduce the purchase number from six to four?

 

A great deal of the subjectivity here comes from multiple-attendees that are used to the previous processes and knowing certain methods to potentially gain an advantage. 

 

From what I've seen so far, the larger syndicates have not been as successful but the acid test will be Sunday. We can probably make a better judgement then. 

 

I respect your definition of fair. I just think other people will have different definitions that may be equally valid to them.

 

I got a ticket yesterday, and I'm delighted. But I still prefer the old system!  To me, being rewarded for perseverance feels fairer than getting lucky in a lottery.

 

 

 

[Rocketfrog1820]

2 hours ago, Euphoricape said:

I wouldn't say it's any more or less fair, but definitely less chaotic.

I'm historically quite unsuccessful on ticket day, the chaos is all I have! Bring back the chaos!!! haha!

[woyski]

2 hours ago, Supernintendo Chalmers said:

As someone who's had varying degrees of personal success in scoring tickets over the past 20 years, the fact that it seemingly removes any ability to affect your chances (by manually refreshing) would appear to make it a level playing field. So I'd stick with my previous description of the new system. It's harder but fairer.

 

However, because of the new system, if I'd never been before, I'd be more concerned that my chances of attending have greatly reduced. 

 

Staring at two green bars for 35 minutes last night, it definitely felt like it was pre-determined that I wasn't going to get a ticket but in fairness, in the past I've not even got a holding page, so maybe in that respect, it's no different?

Agreed, and 10/10 profile pic

[Toilet Duck]

51 minutes ago, Pinhead said:

They could if they wanted, block all those VPN operators, though they clearly have chosen not to do that yet. In future years this could change as no one really needs to use one to access the system do they?

 

As before, organised groups with multiple gateways to the web have the upper hand. As mentioned above, limiting from 6 to 4 might dissuade some of these though I'm sure many would just escalate their client numbers to compensate.

 

Experience has improved as no more blank screen or unreachable errors. Better for customers - better for Public Relations. Bringing a huge global CDN in has made the operation less hit and miss but has officially reduced it to a simple ballot (albeit where those on big lists with more discreet IP's get to draw more straws).

 

 

Yeah, it's pretty much always favoured the big groups though (especially those that have lots of helpers not even trying for their own tickets). New system doesn't really change that and it was pretty much lottery before, had to basically hit F5 at the exact moment a slot opened up (maybe?), but even then, once you got in, it was incredibly frustrating to complete the purchase, so if handling most of the traffic away from See's servers stabilises that and makes the last (most nerve wracking part!) easier and more reliable, then I think I prefer it...didn't get tickets last night, but coach is always a ridiculous bun fight to find seats...highly probable I won't get anything on Sunday either, but plenty of other options available if I don't get in this year (or in the future), and will always try for tickets. It's been getting progressively harder to get tickets anyway, so I resigned myself to that fact a good while ago. 

[Supernintendo Chalmers]

44 minutes ago, uscore said:

 

I respect your definition of fair. I just think other people will have different definitions that may be equally valid to them.

 

I got a ticket yesterday, and I'm delighted. But I still prefer the old system!  To me, being rewarded for perseverance feels fairer than getting lucky in a lottery.

 

 

 

 

Yeah, I see your point of view.

 

Congratulations on getting a ticket, btw! Whatever system is in place, securing a ticket isn't easy and the relief of doing so is probably equal to the excitement of looking forward to the event itself!

[tarw]

1 hour ago, fraybentos1 said:

I am shocked they didn't do that tbh. Surely easy to implement.

 

I don't mind how it is now, it defo seemed more stable and you can still increase your chances by getting family & friends to try for you. Which i think is fair enough.

Could it currently fall foul of the GDPR regs. 
To login before joining the queue See would have to supply the registration database to Queue-it. If people haven’t given informed consent for this to happen it would need to be obtained before giving Queue-it the information it would need. 
If See’s servers were managing the login it would defeat the object of using Queue-it to manage server load

[itschris]

Do we think 10am is soon enough? If approx 25k tickets took 30 minutes to sell out should we be expecting to wait until midday, 1pm? Or does the coach ticket element add a significant amount of time to the process last night?

 

EDIT: Meant to quote Ayrshire Chris's post above.

Edited November 15 by itschris

[fraybentos1]

2 minutes ago, itschris said:

Do we think 10am is soon enough? If approx 25k tickets took 30 minutes to sell out should we be expecting to wait until midday, 1pm? Or does the coach ticket element add a significant amount of time to the process last night?

 

EDIT: Meant to quote Ayrshire Chris's post above.

Doesn't work like that. I imagine they will be gone within the hour.

[incident]

16 minutes ago, tarw said:

Could it currently fall foul of the GDPR regs. 
To login before joining the queue See would have to supply the registration database to Queue-it. If people haven’t given informed consent for this to happen it would need to be obtained before giving Queue-it the information it would need. 
If See’s servers were managing the login it would defeat the object of using Queue-it to manage server load

 

Not sure, but there's multiple ways to do it that wouldn't create a GDPR question - for example email every registration number with their own queue link ahead of the sale.

 

The problem I suspect is that every way of doing it creates its own headaches and risks, and they'd presumably rather not have that hassle. Especially as it would just get gamed another way.

[incident]

8 minutes ago, itschris said:

Do we think 10am is soon enough? If approx 25k tickets took 30 minutes to sell out should we be expecting to wait until midday, 1pm? Or does the coach ticket element add a significant amount of time to the process last night?

 

EDIT: Meant to quote Ayrshire Chris's post above.

 

Coach Sale and Main Sale generally take broadly similar times, despite the differing number of tickets.

 

Coach Sale has more going on with the departure point and time selection so has a lower throughput.

[itschris]

8 minutes ago, incident said:

 

Coach Sale and Main Sale generally take broadly similar times, despite the differing number of tickets.

 

Coach Sale has more going on with the departure point and time selection so has a lower throughput.

Thank you

[dotdash79]

12 minutes ago, incident said:

 

Coach Sale and Main Sale generally take broadly similar times, despite the differing number of tickets.

 

Coach Sale has more going on with the departure point and time selection so has a lower throughput.

Coach sale is normally about 30 min and main sale as been about an hour the last few times. 

[shuttlep]

it is effectively a Ballot

 

which seems fairer, but with a ballot you could enter every year for ten years and never get a ticket. like I have with the London Marathon.  at least the other way if you really wanted to go and did your research you could up your chances.

 

now it is all luck