Neither Chess nor Go in the UK knows anything about this IMSA plan, so I think it is possible that is a made up illusion.

Supposing that the WMSG are to be held in Europe, I suggest that all contribute to that: The national games associations, the EGF, other Europeans wishing to help. E.g., unless the date coincides with the EGC, I could help with Go rules, Go (tournament) rules documents, and Go referee education. There just needs to be some sort of organization that gets things running and asks people to help with organization. Before nothing can be done.

What rules were used during the first WMSG? (at your website I missed the importand Appendix A)

As far as I recall, the WMSG rules were in principle equivalent to Ikeda AIII, i.e.:

- area scoring (with Ing counting)
- last move compensation ("button")
- Superko (but with all kinds of "political" "ifs and whens")

Cyclic Ko

A cyclic ko happens when three or more ko’s appear simultaneously or
when other repetitive situations involving multiple stones, such as “eternal life”,
occur. The principle for handling them is always the same: before placing a
stone that would cause a repetition of the board position, the player must play
away from the repetitive cycle.

Section 5 Ending the Game
Two consecutive passes signal that both players believe that there are no
more points to contest for in the game. The game of placing the stones in
alternation comes to an end and the competition is over. Then:

1. The two players remove dead stones by mutual agreement. The game
ends when all the dead stones have been agreeably removed.

2. In case of disputes on the life and death of any of the stones or the
rights to the vacant points, either player may propose to resume the play and
continue in the original order, until there are two consecutive passes again and
the game comes to its end. In this case, all stones remaining on the board are
alive.

3. Play may only be resumed to confirm the life or death of stones and the
rights to the vacant points enclosed by the living stones. If one or both players
find other contestable points on the board after two passes, those points shall
be left as they stand and are evenly divided between the two players.

As I read it is not a last move compensation ("button") but a first pass compensation.

The rules seem to use positional superko, but it could use some more words.

The end of the game is not very clear (unclear text in bold).




See, even area rules are open to complexities.

It is the same.
With "last move", I refer to the last move before the first pass (Ikeda calls this the "last competitive move"), so it does not matter whether you give the button to the player who passes first or to the opponent of the player who played the last move. I like to think of it as a possible compensation for White if Black gets one more board play than White (it is somehow related to komi, which is a "first move compensation" for White because Black gets to play first). As far as I recall, the interaction with the Ing counting was not very intuitive.

With "last move", I refer to the last move before the first pass (Ikeda calls this the "last competitive move").

The main difference is that the first pass can happen before the last move. (for example teire moves or an opponent that wants to play out all dame and threats) and so one player can do both of them.

Indeed you referred to the last competetive move, but unfortunately the rules did not.
(and in general commentaries may only explain the rules not alter them)