WTF?

Bad.

- I wouldn't be so sure. It's just the important rule discovered by early behaviorists in psychology that people change their behavior based on the feedback they receive (wiki). Ways of giving feedback are numerous. As for the latter part, this is a design problem. If I had information that my challenger has 5 wins, 0 losses, 5 unfinished games, I wouldn't play such person. I'm guessing other people wouldn't either, and coupled with difficulty of finding games as [?] and [x?] player, negative reinforcement loop is created and escaper problem suddenly solves itself.



- How do you make the distinction? People act on bona fide. It's reasonable to assume that games are finished and there's not going to be scumbags who forfeit games, let you wait for their return and never respond to messages you send them. That kind of behavior is rude. My playing experience is important to me.

The current system is leaving a loophole open. The only argument so far has been that not enough players abuse it, so it need not be fixed.

Is this really what you think? That there is not a single reason for the existing system?

If you can't properly state your opponents' position, you're not in a position to refute it.

_________________
When you think your opponent has made a mistake, that's when you should be the most cautious.

As far as the aesthetic argument goes, the italics are no worse than the W+T. Any automated system that judges wins and losses is going to be imperfect; as far as these things go, KGS is pretty damn good.

Just out of curiousity, to the grown-ups who aren't bothered by escapers: would you really mind if the system were improved so that it happened less?

_________________
"When you are learning, it is not so important whether you are right or wrong." - Bill Spight

I would mind if the system gave me losses for the games where my computer crashed, the network went away,... This happened to me on Tygem and I was pretty pissed. I did not get to finish a nice game, just because I exceeded the disconnect time-limit.
On the other hand a perceived problem is automatically a real problem in many contexts. And I think this is one of them. So while personally escapers don't bother me much, I think *something* should be done to appease those who are bothered. As long as it doesn't have any annoying side-effects.

_________________
Sanity is for the weak.

I said "improved," not "changed to punish innocents." My point is that people telling other people to grow up because they consider themselves to have a mature handle on the issue are not contributing much by telling other people to be more like them. It would be reasonable to argue that the KGS system is the best, but if this isn't the argument, then why try to mute suggestions for improvement by shifting the blame from KGS to those who see themselves as the victim (however minor the crime) in an unjust system?

_________________
"When you are learning, it is not so important whether you are right or wrong." - Bill Spight

I would love to see an improvement to the system, but I've yet to see a real improvement among the suggestions.

And it might be an unfair system, but it's ridiculous to talk about it being unjust.

_________________
When you think your opponent has made a mistake, that's when you should be the most cautious.

Just to be clear: can't you look at a persons game history for losses by forfeit? Can forfeits happen any other way than escaping? If this is correct, OP can look in history before deciding to play a person.

- What do you consider improvement? Look at emeraldemon's post I've quoted below. Having forfeit means that the person has escaped enough times. He is an escaper. Regardless of what anyone thinks about escapers, shouldn't this be acknowledged? There's already a tag [~] for players who only want teaching games from stronger players. We don't have to look at each individual's game record to verify it. Perhaps there should be a tag for escapers, too?

It's certainly strange that tildes get marked and escapers don't.

just resign those games that they escaped..that's what I do
it may hurt your rank but at least you have done a good thing for yourself
it's like you forgive someone who once has been a jerk to you
it feels good, try it
btw don't forget to censor them

IMO, making it a loss if they don't return in 5 minutes is an improvement. For those that really like the ability to resume an unfinished game, a "request resume" option could be added.

I don't really see how this could not be an improvement:
1.) No escapers.
2.) Ability to resume.
3.) "Connection problems" can be given some sympathy.

Current system:
1.) Escapers.
2.) Ability to resume.
3.) "Connection problems" can be given some sympathy.

The difference is, it's possible to get rid of escapers altogether. If you don't think a 5 minute time limit is enough for "connection problems", make it 10.

Good one, putting "connection problems" in quotation marks.

_________________
When you think your opponent has made a mistake, that's when you should be the most cautious.

I don't even remember last time when i played with someone, who isn't chronic escaper => so the KGS escaper system works fine. Only the people, who sometimes complain in the chat rooms that "this and this person escaped and where's admin when you need him and these individuals shoud be punished and..." are a bit annoying. And I'm not sure if the rating system are hurting more the escapers -- or players, who can't stand unfinished game in their list, so they resign from game, which they were winning.

Resigning a game you're winning is technically punishable by deranking. You're not supposed to do it. It's certainly a bigger "crime" than escaping.

I cannot win if my opponent refuses to continue.
(And besides that I question your "certainly". ...)

Just define "certainly" as the opinion of the admins, and you'll be fine.

It's against the KGS terms of service. Escaping doesn't seem to be.