[audaz]

If everyone had to confirm their bids and plays, this is now only an option, there would be no need for undoes.
Undoes cause many problems. They give unauthorized information to partner. Many people think they have the right to them and boot you if you reject. Or they ask 50 times until you leave the table. Many people do not understand undoes are for mechanical errors only, they think they have the right to change their mind. And tell their partner they want to change their mind!!

To repeat, undoes aren't really necessary. Just remove confirmations from options and make them part of regular play.

[Vampyr]

 audaz, on 2014-May-24, 00:13, said:

To repeat, undoes aren't really necessary. Just remove confirmations from options and make them part of regular play.

Now the problem will be no one to play with as everyone has found another site.

[1eyedjack]

The term "cure worse than the disease" springs to mind. Switching on confirm bids and plays would double the inconvenience of making every bid or every card played. All to prevent inappropriate undos which certainly do not occur so frequently. Sure, they occur. I don't say that it is not a problem. "Cure worse than the disease" does not imply that there is no disease. And when it does occur you can move tables or call a TD if tourney.

This proposed solution is definitely not for me.

That said: BBO is a software provider/facilitator rather than regulator. The job of regulation is devolved to the tourney host and table host. The more options that BBO leaves to the discretion of the table or tourney host, the better are those two functions served and the better they complement each other. So I have absolutely no problem with BBO granting to the table host or to the tourney host the power to compel confirmations or restrict undos. Whether tables or tourneys that impose those restrictions thrive or wither on the vine will then be down to market forces and Darwinism.

There is an argument that providing too many options makes the interface unnecessarily cluttered and too complicated to navigate. If you provide an option that rarely gets used then that may be an example. However where we are talking about options that are available only to the host of a table or tourney, this argument holds less sway: it is reasonable to assume that a host has some familiarity with the software and can cope with added screen clutter.

[Bbradley62]

 audaz, on 2014-May-24, 00:13, said:

Or they ask 50 times until you leave the table.

I guess this explains why you average only playing about 3 hands before leaving each table?