Proposed solution to the escapers problem...

[hyperpape]

It's not as bad as it sounds. This only happens if you try keep a continuous internet connection for over 24h. So if you shut down your computer at night it won't happen.

I fear Europe more every day.

[tj86430]

I fear Europe more every day.

Europe is not a country.

(I don't fear North America; I think Mexico and Canada are just fine)

[hyperpape]

I fear Europe more every day.

Europe is not a country.

(I don't fear North America; I think Mexico and Canada are just fine)

[caution: not literally something I think]I fear Europe more every day[/caution: not literally something I think].

Is that clear enough now?

[Mr. Mormon]

I really like Tygem's system in the five minutes to reconnect policy. It works well and I've been able to continue playing games a few seconds after I disconnected without any problems.

- I think this is by far the best proposed solution.

I really hope there's a better solution, because I like KGS for the possibility of turn-based games in addition to its other features.

[Bantari]

The point is - whatever solution you pick, it will ALWAYS be unfair to somebody...

What do you think if solution is:

FAIR to players with good intentions to finish their games.
FAIR to players who have sometimes bad connection.
UNFAIR to players who wish to maliciously escape lost games.

...Just from purely theoretical perspective?

Do you believe that there is not and can not be any such solution that satisfies all these three conditions?

Show me the solution and I will give you my opinion about it.
Chances are I will show you a case which breaks one of your above conditions.

For now, the only one which i find fair is the personal attitude adjustment I spoke about...
But I will change my mind once you show me a good system, of course.

[Toge]

Show me the solution and I will give you my opinion about it.

- When a player leaves game for whatever reason, there's a X minute time pool for him to come back. If he doesn't come back, the game is counted as forfeit for the leaving party. There's a possibility to adjourn a game on mutual agreement, which either player can initiate and with option "remember choice for this game" to allow truly turn-based games to happen. Adjourned games work the same way as in current system. The server detects when connection is timed out and provides helpful message "player x [color] is having connection issue", which the player sees in his client's language. After disconnected player comes back to server, discontinued game is automatically opened. Help tab is updated to explain how adjourning games work.

[Bantari]

Show me the solution and I will give you my opinion about it.

- When a player leaves game for whatever reason, there's a X minute time pool for him to come back. If he doesn't come back, the game is counted as forfeit for the leaving party. There's a possibility to adjourn a game on mutual agreement, which either player can initiate and with option "remember choice for this game" to allow truly turn-based games to happen. Adjourned games work the same way as in current system. The server detects when connection is timed out and provides helpful message "player x [color] is having connection issue", which the player sees in his client's language. After disconnected player comes back to server, discontinued game is automatically opened. Help tab is updated to explain how adjourning games work.

Sigh...
So what if there is a storm and I lose power for a prolonged period of time?
I will lose the game even though I am not an escaper, which is not fair for people with bad connections.
Or did I misunderstood your idea?

As a matter of fact what you suggest above is very close to what I posted about the escaper system on PlayOK server. The difference is that if the remaining player also leaves the game before the first player gets back the game gets nullified.

I agree with you that what you propose is a good system (although I like the PlayOk provision or something like that) but this still does not mean it is always fair to everybody except actual escapers.

Another suggestion I like is that the escaping player cannot start a new game as long as the old one is still open, whoever said that had a good idea!

Come to think of it, I came with an idea:
How about adjusting the KGS system so that you cannot have unfinished games older than a certain time interval? For example a week. They are automatically resigned in your name unless you find a way to continue.

If you make this even more better and more prittier and more fairer - you have to add some complexity, for example:
- combine it with the idea that you cannot start a new game at ANY time one of your unfinished games is loaded and the opponent is waiting.
- combine this with the server 'remembering' when you decline an invite to such game, and marks YOU an escaper... even if it was your opponent who originally disconnected.
- and so on...

Still, I maintain my opinion - there is no perfect system.
You have not changed my mind... yet.

[danielm]

Another issue with the timeout is, that grievers can disconnect from a lost game simply to annoy their opponent by having to sit out the timeout (aka rage-quit).

I would like to say that go players are above such immaturity, but we all know that I would be kidding myself.


The KGS system (with tweaks) would be fantastic in my opinion, if coupled with some human administration. The purpose seems to be to reduce administrative effort to practically zero, but without a perfect system (which doesn't exist yet), this will always come with drawbacks.

Abuse is ultimately fairly rare, and I do think that those who decide to abuse do it to a large extend because they know that it is sanctioned by the system, like Araban described in his honest post. If systematic abusers (which could easily be identified by asking players to flag their opponent if the disconnect looks suspicious, an extremely high flag-to-disconnect ratio would be a signal for admins to look into it) would have to fear being caught out and banned by an administrator, in addition to current measures, then I would expect abuse to drop to almost zero.

Even with little effort (even wms himself could occasionally check the "leaders" in the flag-to-disconnect ratio), this could already have a big impact. Potential for drama exists, but I believe it could be prevented by making it very clear from the start that direct complaints will not be considered, and that admins will look at possible abusers only at their own pace and consideration.

By the way, there is no excuse whatsoever not to resign a lost game. No reasonable circumstance is stopping you from eventually returning to the game and resigning it, if you got disconnected in a clearly lost position. So honest players would not have to fear getting into suspicious situations by sheer accident (resigning or finishing a game should obviously discard any flag assigned to it).

If you leave a game in your unfinished game list that is lost beyond any doubt and which you disconnected from (though it's highly questionable even if you didn't), then you are an abuser. Period.

[Nagilum]

I would like a similar default behaviour like on IGS: a short period ( 5-10 minutes ) to cover the lost connection case. If the potenzial escaper doesn't join the game in this period he should lose the game by forfeit at once.

If two players like to adjourn a game for a longer period, the CGoban-Client could use the same mechanism like for "undo": One player press a button "Adjourn" and the other player has to agree by clicking an "Ok"-Button. Otherwise the short period system will be used.
With this solution an adjournment of a game is again a two-sided decision. There is no more work for admins and everyone can judge by himself if he thinks that the opponent just wants to escape from a lost game or not.

[softbank]

Just use TYGEM's policy, i mean, EXACT policy, its very easy.

[Kirby]

I would like a similar default behaviour like on IGS: a short period ( 5-10 minutes ) to cover the lost connection case. If the potenzial escaper doesn't join the game in this period he should lose the game by forfeit at once.

If two players like to adjourn a game for a longer period, the CGoban-Client could use the same mechanism like for "undo": One player press a button "Adjourn" and the other player has to agree by clicking an "Ok"-Button. Otherwise the short period system will be used.
With this solution an adjournment of a game is again a two-sided decision. There is no more work for admins and everyone can judge by himself if he thinks that the opponent just wants to escape from a lost game or not.

Yes, exactly. This is the system that I propose, as well.

@softbank: This is basically Tygem's policy, with just an option for mutually agreed upon adjournment added in.

[Javaness2]

Kirby, why shouldn't you be allowed to not finish a game?

For instance, your mouse battery dies, you click on a 1x1 point instead of answering an atari against 30 stones. You explain the situation, your opponent ignores you. I'd prefer to leave the game, since my opponent is clearly an ignorant little so-and-so.

[Kirby]

Kirby, why shouldn't you be allowed to not finish a game?

For instance, your mouse battery dies, you click on a 1x1 point instead of answering an atari against 30 stones. You explain the situation, your opponent ignores you. I'd prefer to leave the game, since my opponent is clearly an ignorant little so-and-so.

Because you agreed to play a rated game.

The question should be, "Why should you be allowed to not finish a game?".

[judicata]

Kirby, why shouldn't you be allowed to not finish a game?

For instance, your mouse battery dies, you click on a 1x1 point instead of answering an atari against 30 stones. You explain the situation, your opponent ignores you. I'd prefer to leave the game, since my opponent is clearly an ignorant little so-and-so.

Because you agreed to play a rated game.

The question should be, "Why should you be allowed to not finish a game?".

Because your mouse broke, your house is on fire, had something come up at work. . .

[oren]

The question should be, "Why should you be allowed to not finish a game?".

Rating is just a way to match people up of similar strengths. I don't think it should mean that starting a rated game means you enter a steel ring, and one person must be the victor to walk out.

If you just think of escapers as people who resigned and just didn't hit the right button, it makes it a lot easier.