The Eurofurence Forum
Eurofurence Information => Feedback => Topic started by: Blue Raptor on 20.01.2019, 09:20:56
-
I didn't want to moan at first, but since "Any feedback is greatly appreciated!", here's my take.
First of all, I am not just "angry because I did not get a room". It's not the first time I failed the initial run. I am even confident I may still manage to get in with a friend somehow. And I have no problem not getting a room if I insert my request into a system where I have a fair chance and just end up unlucky, because with the numbers as they are, some people have to.
But my gripe is this.
You tell people to get up at a sleepy time to use a web thing, that you absolutely must use because it creates something personalized to mail to the hotel.
When it crashed (*because just everyone retrying all over, or someone using scripts, which was highly foreseeable?), you left everyone retrying with no information on like the Telegram EF-Notification channel whatsoever for a long time.
Then at 7:52 you tell them to "hold on tight please".
On 8:13 you write the method has changed, (not will change but has, at whatever time in the past), and that they now need to hastily type in as little information as possible to be as fast as possible to send a mail to the hotel.
Which is in itself very stressful for everyone, prone to result in typos and badly filled out information, worse for people not good at English, and a death sentence for everyone who just happened to be in the bathroom for a few minutes.
But at that time, from what I can gather now, even if you saw it the very second it popped up and quickly pasted together a mail, hundreds of people already knew of this long before because some people either were told so in their registration when it worked for blink, or somehow figured it out, and word of mouth over a lot of channels was MUCH faster than your official information, so that by then pretty much noone had a real chance anymore anyway.
So you once again defaulted to a system where you have to do something really quickly once you get a key knowledge, but instead of announcing that first, with a fair warning when you will give this key, you apparently just swapped to it, and did not give out this key to everyone on official channels even while it already spreaded more or less secretly anywhere else.
This is bewildering to me.
And you ran into a mess again that was highly forsee-able (and foreseen!), and then just roll with an don't fix it.
You could fix it. Even now still. You CAN say "Our method failed, all reservations are cancelled, please instead fill out <this>, add the code we will give you at <time> via <these channels> and then e-mail it to the hotel."
But you don't. Instead, you once again punish people for trusting you and your information, and reward bypassing and dirtiness.
-
PS: my recurring raffle / room waiting list suggestion:
Make room booking a raffle. Give people time to apply for it and then process all the applications in a random order. You can write down in advance what you want, because there's not THAT many options for first choice, second choice, third choice... when you can also specify in which order to change room type up, room type down, persons, and duration of stay when none of your choices are available.
Or assign everyone registered until the dealine a random room waiting list number in which order the hotel processes the requests. If it goes into the e-mail subject, they can just sort the unanswered mails by subject to do so.
(You could additionally declare that only everything below number Rxxxx will be processed at a given time, like 50 more each morning and each afternoon, so people can even settle things with the hotel without many rooms going away at the time.)
And when you did not make it, it would become your waiting list number and you could show the lowest number in the waiting list so they can estimate if their chances are good or not.
-
I feel your pain.
Similar situation here. We have a small group of maybe 25 furs coming from Hungary, we were on at least half an hour prior to reg opening. Everything crashed, nothing loaded, and for an hour nothing.
We got the information late that the method suddenly changed. Even people who got the info at 8 13 and pasted it for us in our group Only 1 out of 25 got a room...
This whole ordeal collectively wasted countless hours from everyone, then we got an unfair registration as icing on the cake.
Thanks.
-
Same response from Austria here.
Never before have I witnessed so many people from my country who sent the mail exactly at 8:13-8:14 as soon as it got released officially to everyone and did not get a room and not even the chance for a waiting list spot.
They all just got denied.
I only know like 3 or 4 ppl who actually got a room this way.
Oh and: I got a room. Because I could get my hands on my token and therefor could send an email way before 8 o clock and got lucky this way.
Make a fair system, or I'll make sure that next year I also spam 100 mails to the hotel to get a higher chance of getting a room. Pff
-
Hey all,
I will not go into the rant part of things as many others before me have done so so...I'll just express my support for a lottery system, as suggested above.
In the FAQ that has been recently posted you state that it's "already like a lottery system". Then why make it appear as a first come first served system, which does nothing else but introduce stress and grief and encourages cheating/spamming/etc. You are just making your and everybody else's life that much harder.
So here is how I'd imagine the solution (a possible solution):
1. Attendees should have 1-2 weeks after the registration date to choose what type of room they want and who would be their roomies (by name/reg number, not just number of roomies)
2. Once that time is up run a script that goes through the preferences, (similar to how it was suggested above), and randomly distributes the room as best as it can according to those preferences
3. Send an email (not manually but automatically) to each attendee informing them of the result (for their particular booking intention), and at the same time send email templates filled with all the data that has been entered, for each attendee (who requests a room, and got a room through the lottery obviously) in that 2 week registration period , to Estrel, over the course of some reasonable time, thus they are able to process the bookings in their own way at a decent pace. No need for a rush since only the amount of available rooms would be distributed.
4. No chance for exploits from the fandom, no rush, no server crashes, no questions about fairness (everyone has the exact same chance), and everyone who gets a room will already have their roomies registered in the booking as well, thus negating that whole weird section in the FAQ about why a lottery would be somehow less fair than this current disaster.
5. Profit
6. If people cancel reservations in the following couple months (for example to may or june), another lottery run could redistribute the accumulated free rooms, if any.
Cheers,
Equinn
-
Addendum:
It would probably make sense to make the lottery script respect the following priority list:
(0. Staff, this isn't really relevant as its not part of the lottery)
1. Suiters (obviously only proven suiters (photos) , not just "oh I'm a suiter!", and if somebody is caught cheating here, which would be obvious during the fursuit registration, that person would be banned from EF)
2. Artists/dealers who have a spot in the DD/etc
3. Everyone else
Suiters have the biggest need for the facilities in the Estrel (especially showers).
-
The "proven suiter" part is just impossible. There is no way to prove that, no way that EF could enforce that. Also a huge privacy violation.
Your other suggestions are very interesting.
-
Hay!
Well, even now when you register as a fursuiter you have to add a photo showing your suit, and those photos are individually, manually checked to my knowledge. So I see no issue/difference there. Also when you arrive you have to register your suit, where you actually need to present your mask at least (thus just putting in a random fursuit photo won't cut it). Of course every system can be played, but this one would take a bit of work (for example handing the same suit heads around, but that would be quite apparent to be honest...). So if someone who registered as a suiter would show up and be unable to present his suit, or otherwise found out to be cheating, that person would be banned at least for 2 years, which should be a big enough discouragement in my opinion.
-
It would probably make sense to make the lottery script respect the following priority list:
This would be the point, where the lottery isn't a lottery anymore.
Privileging staff seems fair (although it might be questionable if this is ok for - roughly estimated - something like 400 people), but prioritizing everything beyond that basically makes it nearly impossible for "normal" people to get a room as around 50% of the attendees are fursuiters/dealers/etc.
Almost every bigger event uses a first come, first serve system. I think, that this still is - if it works - probably the fairest system as it leaves at least some possibility to have an influence on the chance of "winning".
-
Well, even now when you register as a fursuiter [...]
Eurofurence is a furry convention, not a fursuiting convention. Fursuiting is just one of the many art forms present. :)
-
One more fairly simple option to keep the 'first come first serves' system with a working infrastructure would also be the following:
Use the Mail-Server if the reg, people reg normally, upon acceptance one gets a mail send from the same address later on a template for the booking is send. This allows users to exempt the mail-adress from their spam folder.
On the day of booking the mail server then sends the template for booking - Pre filled by inputting the proper information beforehand into the reg site - starting from Reg number 1 to every single user. This way being early at reg makes sense, also it keep the flood of E-mails slightly at bay as it has a slight lag attached to receiving the mail. You then simply forward said mail to the hotel, code already included, a perfect template they can work with and the deed is done. People who don't care about the main hotel can ignore it simply or even opt out beforehand - or opt-in if they are interested - causing no more information leaks, unfair advantages and so on to be there.
Just one of a ton of solutions which are easily doable, in the realm of what we know by know of how it's handled and swiftly thought up.
-
Honestly, I'm not sure how it is important to have an influence on the outcome (probabilities) by the attendees...There are far less spots in the Estrel than attendees, the only fair way of distributing them is a lottery. A first come first served system will depend heavily on conditions beyond the control of those trying to book. Such as state of the local network, state of the remote network, how emails are routed, and so on. I'm baffled why anyone would suggest this is fairer than a lottery that gives everyone the same chance (if no priority system is implemented), by definition. Why would you instead want a system that is competitive and lends itself to abuse, and causes a ton of stress? If you take away that illusion of "control", at least you don't have to worry about being quick. You know you have the same chance as others.
I can, sort of, understand how some would be against giving priority to suiters (and artists), although personally, I find this a bit selfish, since I tend to think, that if someone is in a lot more need of a room close by, then that person should get it, over somebody who simply has to walk/travel 5-10 minutes more (probably once or maybe twice a day)....This is simply "being nice" and looking out for others not just ourselves. For my first two years I was within a 5 minute walking distance of the hotel, didn't really ruin the experience for me, but again, this is probably up to one's personality.
Also, suiters who request a room may have non suiter roomies. The lottery is drawn between those who requested rooms. The roomies may be non suiters, obviously, so you'll end up with a mix, maybe that was a point of confusion.
-
Well, even now when you register as a fursuiter you have to add a photo showing your suit, and those photos are individually, manually checked to my knowledge. So I see no issue/difference there.
The difference is the timing. If you register as a fursuiter and show your head, that gives you access to the fursuit lounge for the next few days. That means you first prove you are a fursuiter and (shortly) afterwards enjoy fursuiter privileges.
With the hotel reservation that would be the other way around: first enjoy the privileges (hotel room reservation), then, seven months later, prove you are/were entitled to it. There are just so many ways that could go wrong and cause drama...
-
The difference is the timing. If you register as a fursuiter and show your head, that gives you access to the fursuit lounge for the next few days. That means you first prove you are a fursuiter and (shortly) afterwards enjoy fursuiter privileges.
With the hotel reservation that would be the other way around: first enjoy the privileges (hotel room reservation), then, seven months later, prove you are/were entitled to it. There are just so many ways that could go wrong and cause drama...
Yes, but even upon registration the photo(s) are checked one by one, manually, to my knowledge (as it stands , to filter out unsuitable suits, pardon the pun). So you'd have to fool that first level at least, and once you are at the Estrel you would have a very hard time convincing anyone that you are a suiter while you don't have a suit, and you'd be banned. Why would someone do that? They would have themselves banned with about a 95 % chance. That's one hell of a risk to take.
But fine, the priority list is probably too controversial in the community (unfortunately), given all the types of people in it, to implement without a massive can of worms opened. But I still believe the lottery has the biggest merit.
-
A lottery system is definitely fine as well, would be a fairly fair solution without taking into perspective bigger groups wanting to go to the convention together while also staying more or less together.
If we want to talk about priority for places in the main hotel, those would be - in my opinion - for people in the dealers den. It makes sense after all, they have to carry a lot of things and being in the hotel is basically mandatory for most to be able to handle it. Also I'm definitely for a priority of people with disabilities that impair them from moving large distances. Wheelchairs, heavy asthmatics and similar conditions in that case. Both often can't attend or are unable to be in the den without snatching a room at the Estrel directly.
I've talked about that already several times though, and it always lead to a long discussion with nobody being able to give a satisfactory answer as to why they shouldn't be given priority. There are definitely obvious reasons as to why they should, as long as it is able to be proven beforehand, namely with registration. Yes, it absolutely is more work for the reg-team, and that's the only reason as to why it wouldn't be implemented if they're already overwhelmed with handling it - which it clearly seems like that is the case.
Also, 'first come first serve' system doesn't necessarily mean that it's unfair. It can't be denied that a miniscule amount of lottery is involved because of network situations, though the majority still rests at people preparing properly to follow the steps as swiftly as possible, may the best win.
But well... basically EVERYTHING is better then what we have now, it was fairly obvious that not much thought was given into the system since last year, otherwise those problems wouldn't have become so openly visible, problems which were mostly known last year for anyone taking a single glance and should've been solved. Namely lowering the load people cause on the servers first to ensure stability and streamlining the booking to make it as easy for attendees as well as the hotel, both which are major oversights.
So, just to hope this was a wake-up call for next year, and that the feedback is properly looked through and implemented to a degree where as many people as possible are content with, providing no more loopholes and finally leaving everyone with less frustration then the last years as well as less work for everyone. Automation for as many steps as possible is definitely mandatory to achieve this.
-
A lottery system is definitely fine as well, would be a fairly fair solution without taking into perspective bigger groups wanting to go to the convention together while also staying more or less together.
That doesn't work right now either, in the current system. The lottery would retain the ability to keep small groups (2-3 people) together though, since you'd specify your roomies in your room preference, by name/reg number. It wouldn't just spread people into rooms randomly and pair them up automatically, that would never work,instead it would spread the rooms randomly among those who requested one.
Also, 'first come first serve' system doesn't necessarily mean that it's unfair. It can't be denied that a miniscule amount of lottery is involved because of network situations, though the majority still rests at people preparing properly to follow the steps as swiftly as possible, may the best win.
Actually that minuscule is massive. Mostly thanks to how emails work. But that's a whole different topic. Suffice to say, that a ton of emails in a short time will be pretty much randomized. Also creating a competitive environment in this context is not something I personally support, but again, that's me.
So, just to hope this was a wake-up call for next year, and that the feedback is properly looked through and implemented to a degree where as many people as possible are content with, providing no more loopholes and finally leaving everyone with less frustration then the last years as well as less work for everyone. Automation for as many steps as possible is definitely mandatory to achieve this.
Honestly, ladenfurence should've been a wake-up call already...This year it was actually worse, so yes..this definitely has to lead to some major changes. I do believe those involved don't want to intentionally make anything bad,it's just the lack of experience, and thought, that might've been due to other duties, etc...not that this is an excuse. What I'm getting at is that I still hold out hope that they'll move towards a radically different, and functional solution to avoid this grief.
-
Personally I think last year was perfectly fine when it came to hotel reservations, comparing 2017, 2018 and 2019. And I'm talking about 2018 of course, not the 2017 Ladenfurence incident. You just registered and after your registration was accepted, you were able to send the generated email. Of course there was an initial rush with the registration and it wasn't ideal for Estrel since it took place in the evening on a Saturday. But out of all of these, it felt the least stressful and it didn't take that long, comparing to the 4 hours it took me to be able to book the room at EF23 and bit over an hour to be able to send the email this year (which ended up me being waitlisted).
But this is of course just my personal opinion. If we really had to prioritize people who get to reserve rooms, it would be first staff and then maybe the people who are in the dealers den. That would require DD team to choose the people for the den before hotel reservation even starts tho, so I don't know how ideal that is in the end, for the DD team and the artists. But I fail to see why fursuiters would be prioritized just because they are fursuiters, since they are not going to the con to work like staff or sell merch at the den. It's not mandatory to fursuit at the con (or any con) in the first place. For reference, I am a fursuiter (with two fullsuits) and would prefer a room at the Estrel but this time I just wasn't lucky enough. I'll still bring my suit most likely, but just won't be suiting as much probably.
I think it would be interesting to try a full on lottery style approach to the reservation but I know it will be an issue to some people. But whatever is decided for next year, there will be atleast someone who is not OK with it regardless. Atleast having the rooms non-transferable makes it a little better since if you can't come, you cancel it and the room just goes to the next person in the waiting list. If they were transferable, the whole waiting list would be kinda pointless.. :b
-
Another few of those many possible solutions:
For a lottery based system:
After registration a selection of possible room options (and their respective prices) is shown, every user chooses each they would be willing to take (or rather pay for).
Before the booking begins Estrel then sends their contingent of rooms to the orga, they put in a simple amount of reg numbers viable shown for the category. To stop double confirmations for several room types as soon as one number is chosen for a higher type of room it gets blocked to be chosen again for the lower type.
And last but not least there is an automatically generated mail send to the attendees with a personalized code only available for them, the hotel at the same time receiving a list of viable codes to cross-check with a single look who sends an actual proper booking mail.
As an upside, the random generator can even take over the bother of the waiting list, generating an entry for every single one wanting a room but not being able to get one, as well as informing them for which number they are in the waiting list, able to be checked upon logging in on the registration site. This way not only would it lower the amount of input needed to keep the system working for everyone, it also finally allows to see if there is an actual chance of getting a room in time.
If the booking isn't validated after a certain amount of time the spot automatically moves over to the next person, as for the amount of time needed for that, well... the orga and hotel definitely know those best.
Simple, quick, without bother.
As for another 'first comes first serves' solution:
A little extra at the EF app, a token generator. You can always generate a personal token based on your registration number and a hidden keyword which is on the registration server. At the respective booking time that keyword gets changed over to a new one for the year, as well as a list of viable codes once more send over to the hotel. This way people only have fetch a single code from the server, not putting it under a lot of pressure and allowing for a swift and painless procession of bookings. A template for the mail being available beforehand already where only the code needs to be put in.
@Reshi: At least you got onto the waiting list, that's more then (from what I'm hearing and reading) 90% of people can say. If you were sending the booking mail at the time of the official release of the code you were out of luck already. Getting an actual room was very rare and getting on the waiting list as well. Most only got 'well, screw you, search somewhere else' basically.
-
Yes, but even upon registration the photo(s) are checked one by one, manually, to my knowledge (as it stands , to filter out unsuitable suits, pardon the pun). So you'd have to fool that first level at least, and once you are at the Estrel you would have a very hard time convincing anyone that you are a suiter while you don't have a suit, and you'd be banned.
I don't think a priority list is too controversial, I just don't believe it is practical.
AFAIK ticking the "fursuiter" box and uploading a photo to the registration server is just for statistics and optimization (printing fursuit badges in advance); the actual proof is showing the head at the registration desk.
Suppose I register as a fursuiter, then get a hotel room (because of fursuiter priority), and then, during the seven months somehow become a non-fursuiter (fursuit gets damaged or stolen, or maybe I intended to build my first fursuit, but didn't quite finish it in time; a lot can happen in seven months). Then of course I should cancel my room at the Estrel and find other accomodation, because at the start of the con, someone will take the time to check wether all those who got a hotel room through priority still have their priority status? That's just not practical.
Notice how Eurofurence tries hard to have nothing to do with the hotel bookings: they do not know who wants a room, they do not know who got a room or who is on the waiting list. They can only control (via the booking codes) who gets a chance to book a room (and when).
-
I don't think a priority list is too controversial, I just don't believe it is practical.
AFAIK ticking the "fursuiter" box and uploading a photo to the registration server is just for statistics and optimization (printing fursuit badges in advance); the actual proof is showing the head at the registration desk.
Suppose I register as a fursuiter, then get a hotel room (because of fursuiter priority), and then, during the seven months somehow become a non-fursuiter (fursuit gets damaged or stolen, or maybe I intended to build my first fursuit, but didn't quite finish it in time; a lot can happen in seven months). Then of course I should cancel my room at the Estrel and find other accomodation, because at the start of the con, someone will take the time to check wether all those who got a hotel room through priority still have their priority status? That's just not practical.
Notice how Eurofurence tries hard to have nothing to do with the hotel bookings: they do not know who wants a room, they do not know who got a room or who is on the waiting list. They can only control (via the booking codes) who gets a chance to book a room (and when).
Yes, exactly, a priority for fursuiters is rather far back on the list definitely, at least that's my opinion. As to why? First, a suit can be transported fairly well at a single day and then stored in the fursuit lounge as many do, especially those from outside the Estrel. This has worked for years and hasn't stopped many from actually bringing it.
Hence why my focus was mainly on people who actually need to be in the Estrel to be able to enjoy the con decently or offer something to the con to make it better. Namely for the first impaired people who already have a hard time getting from one place to another and everyone in the dealers den as those often have quite the amount of wares sitting around, making it a nightmare to transport further then the garage and back, or to the room. Also getting something during the opening times is nigh impossible if you're outside of the Estrel, the time your table would be empty is just too long, as well as sending someone else isn't feasable usually.
I can't think of other people who might be in need for a place in the Estrel primarily, besides the helpers, which is fairly obvious and already implemented.
Also, as an important part, the orga already has a fair amount to do with bookings, after all it's impossible to get a room if you're not proving to go to the convention via the registration and the code provided, as well as cross-checking if those registrations are still viable from time to time. The problem I see is that it's - sorry for the following words, I just don't find any better - half-assed. Trying to stay out as much as possible has proven to be detrimental, hence there needs to be a way to properly work together with the Estrel to ensure everything moves without issues, working tighter together then it is the case at the moment, within the limitations given. There's still a lot of room to work in that's unused, and that part has to be taken up and used now.
-
Notice how Eurofurence tries hard to have nothing to do with the hotel bookings: they do not know who wants a room, they do not know who got a room or who is on the waiting list. They can only control (via the booking codes) who gets a chance to book a room (and when).
This is correct, and even for multiple reasons, including legal, data protection, financial, risk, on our side as well as what the hotel is able, willing and allowed to work with, for the same list of reasons on their side.
within the limitations given.
Yes, indeed, that is the biggest blocker and reason why most of your suggestions, as well as many of our own ideas so far, in the end cannot be implemented. And I can assure you that we, too, are very unhappy about this, but short of not doing a con anymore at all, we have to choose one of the feasible options, even if none of them are what I'd call perfect.
*sigh*
-
Personally I think last year was perfectly fine when it came to hotel reservations, comparing 2017, 2018 and 2019.
I agree that out of those three 2018 was the smoothest, i.e. everything worked as expected. The server didn't crash, probably because handing out registration numbers is less work for the server than producing hotel reservation forms, for which people have to log in first. And hotel reservation was stretched out over time, because people had to have their registration manually confirmed first, so no stress there for the server.
But there were still some disadvantages:
- people had to wait several hours for their registration confirmation and then react quickly, if they wanted a room
- the Estrel had to have staff in the office at a rather unusual time
This year's procedure would have gotten rid of both points, if it had worked (i.e. if the server had not crashed). The interesting problem now is to find a room booking procedure that does not have these disadvantages and does not put too much stress on the server.
-
Yes, indeed, that is the biggest blocker and reason why most of your suggestions, as well as many of our own ideas so far, in the end cannot be implemented. And I can assure you that we, too, are very unhappy about this, but short of not doing a con anymore at all, we have to choose one of the feasible options, even if none of them are what I'd call perfect.
*sigh*
That's quite understandable, and if it weren't frustrating then I would be fairly surprised and definitely not trusting the least into the orga anymore.
What I find fairly boggling though is that there's no feedback coming from official channels about the options presented, which ones are absolutely impossible to do? What's the issue they would cause? Which ones are at least close to the realm of possibilities? Since you're already asking feedback, meaning you clearly need every possible help there is to solve the problem as quick and with as little issues as possible, wouldn't it then be good to let people know where those issues exactly are instead of generally saying 'it's legality issues'. Nobody here can give a proper solution or something which can be made into one if they have to do guesswork out into the blue, simply because everyone lacks a fundamental understanding of how those things work in the background.
Would a lottery be feasable?
Is a token even doable?
Can a template for the booking be handed out far in advance to only attach the codeword at the respective time?
Has the codework to be a single one for the hotel, or is a personalized one possible?
Is a priority for specific groups besides helper and fixed con-staff even relevant?
All those and surely many more are unanswered, and while a week seems like a long time for someone edging on hearing news for possible solutions, it at least would be possible to inform us about the things which have been pushed out as feedback already. Nobody knows if you're swimply twindling your thumbs in the background (unlikely) if there are solutions up for discussion or you're still stumbling completely in the dark. Knowing that would at least allow to work on without letting the threat - and issue - once again die down.
And yes, last year was clearly the best solution of the trio of years, which is sad to hear that causing a ton of stress for everyone involved was actually better then having a streamlined (dumbly implemented to say though) system in place.
-
This year's procedure would have gotten rid of both points, if it had worked (i.e. if the server had not crashed). The interesting problem now is to find a room booking procedure that does not have these disadvantages and does not put too much stress on the server.
Or just throw enough server capacity against it. With the big cloud services you can rent that capacity just for the occasion. But you need someone who can prgramm the app for a cloud service, you just can't throw your excisting one in and let it magically scale ;-)
-
Notice how Eurofurence tries hard to have nothing to do with the hotel bookings: they do not know who wants a room, they do not know who got a room or who is on the waiting list. They can only control (via the booking codes) who gets a chance to book a room (and when).
Okay, so this is exactly what would change. And it still wouldn't mean EF has to "deal" with the bookings, Estrel would still be handling that obviously. What gave anyone the impression otherwise? The difference is that EF would control who's application is sent to the Estrel, based on a lottery result. Doing this, legally, should be no different than flooding the Estrel with thousands of emails and leaving the random choice up to them (because yes, due to the fact that those emails will NOT arrive in order, its already a random choice, this has been stated by EF staff as well). I thought this would be quite clear to everyone. Instead of telling a group to charge at Estrel, you take their applications and select , randomly, the amount that matches the free spots in the Estrel, and send THAT to them (to the Estrel). If it's such a legal issue to handle (more) personal data, to autofill and autosend the emails to Estrel after the lottery, then just send the notification to the winners of the lottery and ask them to fill out an email template (the part with their personal info), as it is done now. The difference being that everyone who sends those emails, gets a room. This would be simply admitting to the already random nature of the whole process and consolidating it into a system that is a LOT less stressful to everyone. (Yes I did simplify the random selection part, since obviously it would need to take into account pairings, and room types requested, maybe even alternative choices, etc, because that's just a matter of coding the logic for it, and it's not exactly rocket science especially for experiences backend devs)
Again, I don't understand how this leads to concerns from the EF staff such as voiced by Zefiro, in this thread....
Yes, indeed, that is the biggest blocker and reason why most of your suggestions, as well as many of our own ideas so far, in the end cannot be implemented. And I can assure you that we, too, are very unhappy about this, but short of not doing a con anymore at all, we have to choose one of the feasible options, even if none of them are what I'd call perfect.
This is correct, and even for multiple reasons, including legal, data protection, financial, risk, on our side as well as what the hotel is able, willing and allowed to work with, for the same list of reasons on their side.
Sorry but I don't see where this is coming from (how these are concerns in this case). Again you'd not be handling bookings, you'd simply be pre-filtering the applications based on a lottery system, and that has nothing to do with the Estrel. The only information required from the Estrel is the actual number (and types) of free rooms to start with, and that data is already available.
Honestly I can't believe that handling personal data, to auto send the booking emails to Estrel, would translate to such a huge challenge that the only other option is to not have a con....But even so , as stated above, there is a way around even that.