What are we going to do? Nova or Kaya or what?

[hyperpape]

I don't get why I could be playing a game, someone would leave and I would be labeled the loser.

Well, what if you were losing?

The game isn't over until both players pass or I resign, those are the rules of Go. If I'm losing I'll either give up or try to come back, an action of my opponent can't decide which one it will be.

And do those rules mention the time system?

[csobod]

The game isn't over until both players pass or I resign, those are the rules of Go. If I'm losing I'll either give up or try to come back, an action of my opponent can't decide which one it will be.

And do those rules mention the time system?

Timing has nothing to do with this. Internet play brings a whole new problem not considered before. The only equivalent of a dropped connection would be someone walking into a live game and abducting one of the players. You are being prevented from continuing. Automatic adjournment with the chance to resume once you've returned is the only fair choice, but it's too easily abused.

I've yet to hear a better solution; maybe something like automatic adjournment, with the caveat being the inability to play ranked games until the adjourned game is completed (if the player who automatically adjourned the match upon disconnection cannot resume play with the opposing player, moderators can intervene).

[SpongeBob]

I've yet to hear a better solution;

Yeah? Adjournment has to be agreed upon by both players (each player gets to ask for adjournment once per game). Otherwise, the disconnected player loses after 5 minutes. End of escaper discussion.

[Kirby]

I've yet to hear a better solution;

Yeah? Adjournment has to be agreed upon by both players (each player gets to ask for adjournment once per game). Otherwise, the disconnected player loses after 5 minutes. End of escaper discussion.

I've come to this conclusion, too. I don't know why more people don't agree with this policy.

[Tami]

It looks like this discussion has drifted away a bit. No new server can "solve" the escaping issue, only provide a different solution. Still, if you express your opinion on it and other topics, then developers can at least know what things are important to people. But, again, it`s only about choice: I`d like to have alternatives to KGS, and still to have KGS!, but there will never be a perfect go server.

[hyperpape]

My point is that he's talking out of his rear when he says "the rules of go." The rules of go are either the basic rules (alternating play, capturing, scoring a completed game), in which case, they don't say a thing about the process of ending the game. Or they're something like the rules of a go server or tournament, which can have all kinds of procedures surrounding timing, adjudication, respectful behavior and so on. The latter kinds of rules are determined by consensus, voting, tradition or what have you--there's no impartial authority on what those rules should be.

If you don't like a particular way of resolving a game that someone leaves, that's fine--you can argue that your way is better than mine*. But don't pretend like you're just saying what the rules of go are. You're expressing a personal preference about how to handle a competition. It can be better or worse for various reasons, but you can't settle it by talking about what "the rules of go are".

* I don't think the bot idea would work that well. It can only reliably score games that are already unbalanced, it probably can't score strong players. But it's a nice idea, even if it doesn't work.

[Kirby]

It looks like this discussion has drifted away a bit. No new server can "solve" the escaping issue, only provide a different solution.

Perhaps, but SpongeBob's solution is the best solution

The only argument I've *ever* heard against it is that on KGS, you have the option to "not play with people you don't want to play with".

[oren]

For the sake of argument, you're playing a 30s byoyomi game and meet a player who refuses to end the game and plays inside his own territory and your territory for a while. What do you do?

Personally, I think it's fine to 'escape' in this case. Should I get a loss? It sounds like you think so. Would I take a loss, yes. I don't want to waste time I could be playing a good game.

[skydyr]

It looks like this discussion has drifted away a bit. No new server can "solve" the escaping issue, only provide a different solution.

Perhaps, but SpongeBob's solution is the best solution

The only argument I've *ever* heard against it is that on KGS, you have the option to "not play with people you don't want to play with".

I don't like SpongeBob's solution, because abandoned games can skew the ranking system, intentionally or not. Of course, the counterargument that not counting abandoned games will skew the system is also true, which makes me think that the ideal solution is to remove serial disconnecters from the ranking system. Beyond that, I think that most of the people who get angry about escapers now will also be angry about them if they are awarded a win, though I may be wrong about this.

[HermanHiddema]

Perhaps, but SpongeBob's solution is the best solution

Is not! Is too! Is not! Is too!

[oren]

Beyond that, I think that most of the people who get angry about escapers now will also be angry about them if they are awarded a win, though I may be wrong about this.

I'm guessing you're wrong about that.

[billywoods]

The only argument I've *ever* heard against it

What about the (very simple) argument that someone's internet connection might go down for 5 minutes? My connection once failed for something like 15 seconds, and when I came back online, my opponent had left - and I probably suffered a loss for that.

There are good reasons to escape deliberately, there are bad reasons to escape deliberately, and there are good excuses for escaping accidentally. It's really not quite as simple as satisfying everyone with one simple blanket rule, and would require far too much input from mods to get them to adjudicate (not to mention the obvious problems this would cause). Besides which, the thing I dislike about escapers is not that they stole a win from me (as if I care), and so whether or not we 'punish' this person by denying them a win or giving them a loss or something seems to miss the point. What I dislike is the frustration that occurs when I'm having fun and someone else either gets upset/angry or deliberately tries to make me upset/angry. The disappointing thing is the malicious intent or ill feelings, not the result of the game.

[Bantari]

Beyond that, I think that most of the people who get angry about escapers now will also be angry about them if they are awarded a win, though I may be wrong about this.

I'm guessing you're wrong about that.

So basically, you are saying that people who complain about escapers don't give a hoot about lack of respect that shows to them and to the game - all they care is the rating points, right? As long as they are awarded a win, all behavior is acceptable?

[Bantari]

The only argument I've *ever* heard against it

What about the (very simple) argument that someone's internet connection might go down for 5 minutes? My connection once failed for something like 15 seconds, and when I came back online, my opponent had left - and I probably suffered a loss for that.

Well, then you will suffer a loss. So?

I guess it is like in a tournament - when you get a phone call in the middle of the game that your wife is in hospital, you drop the game and run... and you will lose the game as the result. I lost a few games like that in tournaments where I was too 'sick' to play a round, so? Next tournament I won a game because my opponent was 'sick' one round, so? Big deal...

I think people really make a HUGE THING out of this issue. So you lose a game every now and then. What a tragedy!! I bet every now and then you win a game for silly reasons as well... I lost many online games because of something unrelated happening around me providing distractions... you might not even know how many times you win like that. Shall all these wins be removed from your record too? How would you like that, buster, eh?

I really think it all evens out in the end. And the relative dependability of the rating system proves my point.

So - unless somebody can prove to me that the escaper problem (or the way it is handled by KGS or another server) has serious influence on rating system - I say this is all just whining. When you are 1d, and you play another 1d on KGS - are you about equal, or is there a huge discrepancy? If you are about equal - get over yourself and the escaper issue. If there is huge discrepancy - lets talk about *that*.

[Javaness2]

There are cases where it seems perfectly fair not to continue the game, some examples
1. Your opponent threatens to kill your children
2. Your opponent refuses to allow an obvious misclick such as 1-1 point on move 3
3. You discover that your opponent is sandbagger
4. Some domestic incident requires your immediate attention
5. Your opponent is playing every single legal move possible purely in order to tick you off
If you meet any of those in a real life game, you would obviously be within your rights not to continue the game, and it is no different on the internet. The instigator 1,2,3 & 5 are unlikely to agree to an adjournment. I doubt escaping has that much effect on people's rating, nor do I believe people should be psychologically damaged by it.