@<most of you>: I promise there will be options to tweak the appearance of the board and stones and whatever you like. Don't expect that, soon, however. If I've put up a screenshot of it, that probably means I've called it “good enough” for now and moved on to other things – otherwise, I risk building an enormously aesthetic chocolate tea-pot and that's not useful to anyone. Visuals are terribly dangerous – it is too easy to get caught up, tweaking and polishing them and they can easily consume infinite time.
@ez4u: Yes, you understand the feature correctly and, yes, I am still in two minds about the stronger-player-is-the-away-team idea. It does seem a bit confusing. It was an extension of an idea that I implemented in the game-list view because, when testing, I found it much easier to find intriguing games by sorting the game-list by “stronger” or “weaker” instead of “white” or “black”. It's all of two lines to change it so it might not survive too many more revisions. In the end, it works out that white is nearly always 'away', in practice.
@ez4u: The order of the list of users in a channel (either a game or room) is currently arbitrary but will certainly be sortable at some point.
@ez4u: Lastly, if the number of overtime periods or stones is greater than 30 (two rows of three groups of five; five more than the most common Canadian overtime setting), the dots will simply be hidden and only the numeric counter will be displayed to avoid a very large and unwieldy hoard of the little critters.
