this should be intresting....

In a 2 stone game, I pick a 4-4 if my opponent does, purely so it doesn't give him the only "ideal approach" move. It's probably just personal preference. I'll go with the majority, but D16 appeals.

Should we divide the labour a bit to our strengths? So a couple of people spend a disproportionate time working out aji and L+D on magicwand's groups for example?

For our next move, D16 looks good to me too. But I'll go with whatever reasonable move you guys want to make - as long as it is in the open corner.

BTW, I'm assuming that this is egalitarian. I happen to have been the organizer, but after that, nobody is in charge.

Same move for me, too. Let's make all the corners equal, not giving him any unfinished-corner approaches.

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

[go]$$Wcm1
$$ ---------------------------------------
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . B . . . . . , . . . . . X . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . , . . . . . , . . . . . , . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . X . . . . . , . . . . . O . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ ---------------------------------------[/go]

I think he'll need it.

Two stones? I think all of us together are very likely to win at two stones. In my two stone game I had a decent shot of it. In Kirby's games vs. Magicwand I think most of us notice his mistakes as they happen (being an outside observer is worth 8 stones or something like that). In this sort of game, the primary benefit of the "gang" is that we can point out each other's errors (see, for example, Arimaa's "one vs the mob" series of games). At our level we still lose most games by making bad moves as opposed to missing brilliant moves. At least I do.

So, I propose that for more consequential moves we wait up to a day for a dissenting opinion to show up even if three people agree. If four agree, just make the move (someone may be tied up for a few days, that shouldn't halt the game). It's absolutely essential that we avoid every bad move we possibly can. I also propose that everyone should try to study the position before looking at the suggestions of the other "gang" members, as that may very well bias you or short-circuit your thought process, causing you to miss something you ordinarily wouldn't.

One technique to make the best group decisions possible is to thoroughly discuss the problem before proposing solutions (see: http://lesswrong.com/lw/ka/hold_off_on_ ... ions/). We might be able to apply that in complex situations.

i usually play knight approach but...
i think i need to create a situation where they dont agree.
something different and see how they disagree

Magicwand likes making complicated situations with fighting and aji. I see no reason to allow a double approach, so I'd keep things simple with O16.

I always O16 in this position in handicap games, and I've had a 7d tell me it was correct. I don't like to play high twice on the same board, though, because white eventually gets sente and undercuts one of them.

He's doing it too, so if necessary, we can play that game just as well as him

On that note, if he leaves it alone, we can also pincer it quite effectively too. It's up to us to rip sente out of his dead hands I think.

I might be overcompensating for the fact that my high extensions seem to die a lot around strong players...

We could consider a counter-approach at O3; I suspect MW will approach the bottom left next. Despite that, I also like O16 better at the moment, because it seems bigger.

I also agree with O16. I don't have any deep and insightful thoughts behind it, it just seems like the most obvious move (not to say there aren't others)

Click Here To Show Diagram Code

[go]$$Wcm1
$$ ---------------------------------------
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . X . . . . . , . . . B . X . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . O . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . , . . . . . , . . . . . , . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . X . . . . . , . . . . . O . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ ---------------------------------------[/go]

Anyway, that's 4/5 consensus, and I doubt Joaz will propose something so different and so much better that we'll change our minds, so I'm going to post it. For future reference, is this the point where whoever is posting can feel free to reveal the move? Or would the rest of you rather we wait for all five views to come in, even in likely unanimous decisions like this?

Maybe we can wait for some period of time before posting a move. I agree with both moves posted, but if we get going too fast, there may be some moves made without some people even noticing. It'd be good to at least have a chance to contribute, even if you're against the majority.

For example, a new idea could promote discussion, and lead to people changing their minds.

What do others think about the process for finalizing a move?

Hello, fellows. Just a suggestion: I've been thinking that for the Malkovich games where multiple people need to discuss a move it might be helpful to hold the discussion on a separate page to keep the forum post a little less cluttered. I've went ahead and created an example for this game here. Note that in the caption for the board there are three names in parentheses which might be used to indicate signing off on the move. Once there is a majority -- if that is how you decided to proceed -- the last voter could copy and paste the comments and add his own in the forum post that contains the move.

I hope you don't mind my using of yours names in my example.

Sounds great, I've posted a response on the SL page