Life In 19x19

People seem to be picking up that Kaya sucked mainly but not exclusively because KGS is already at the bare minimum size at which a healthy Go ecology is possible. You would think the logical step would be obvious, but no one seems to be drawing the right conclusion. How empty are thy boards...

jts wrote:People seem to be picking up that Kaya sucked mainly but not exclusively because KGS is already at the bare minimum size at which a healthy Go ecology is possible. You would think the logical step would be obvious, but no one seems to be drawing the right conclusion. How empty are thy boards...

Hold on there. It`s a bit harsh to say "kaya sucked". It has lots of great features and it is a very pleasant place to play go. Gabriel and Pato did try to deliver on their promises, and although, having donated money to them, I`m more than a bit disappointed to see the current situation, I would still love to see Kaya grow and flourish.

For me, the lack of a way to decline games I do not want to play is a big turn-off (see the Kaya forum for more), but I`m still more than happy to play there when I can find a partner.

But, I suppose it brings me full circle. I have criticised KGS quite a lot in the past, but I regret that now. WMS clearly put in a great deal of work, and appears to be working very hard on a new web client, and I`ve got a lot of pleasure out of KGS over the years, far more enjoyment than frustration. So, rather than criticising KGS, it seems better to support new servers when they appear. If one or two rivals can become established among Western users, then it`s better for everyone - more choice, more opponents.

So that`s all I`ve been trying to say: don`t bash KGS, just accept it and enjoy it as it is, and if do you feel frustrated with it, use other servers that offer other features and other policies. You can`t complain about a userbase being small unless you`re willing to put some effort into being part of that userbase.

For more than 35 years I have been a fanatic Go player and a fanatic Backgammon player. At the end of the 20th century world class backgammon software was finally developed. These bots play as well as any human in the world. Backgammon servers became popular. There is also the issue of escapers on these servers. The escaper problem was solved in the following way: when the game is suspended, the players have about three weeks to complete the game. If they don't, the world class backgammon bot automatically and accurately adjudicates a winner (because of the dice, this is a probability of winning). Both player rankings are appropriately adjusted. Escaper problem solved.

For Go on KGS, the developers cannot satisfactorily improve their website unless they are adequately paid for their efforts. Here is one way to generate income for the KGS developers.

On KGS the ZEN19BS software plays better than the vast majority of players on the website. It currently uses KGS resources and could be compelled to run on a different computer to finish each game involving an escaper, playing both Black and White from the current position. The winner is determined and the game adjudicated. For all games on KGS where at least one player is a paid-up KGS Plus member, this adjudication by ZEN19BS would occur automatically before four weeks had passed. If the players resume and complete the suspended game before that time, no adjudication would take place. If neither player was a KGS Plus member, no adjudication would ever occur. Thus, if escapers annoy you, you can pay KGS to alleviate the annoyance.

Pentimento: Perhaps at least 25 moves (or some other number) of the fuseki would be needed to label the suspended game as escaped.

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

Oh Lord, won't you buy me a programming skills?

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

If you are getting absolutely crushed and your opponent loses their internet connection (say the power goes out), should you get a win? That seems more bizarre to me.

It may also discourage sandbagging by helping to ensure that ranks stay relatively accurate.

BaronGossettEulerPhD, the bots on KGS do not run on KGS hardware. They are functionally/technically equivalent to you or I. They log in to KGS and play games just like normal users.

sefo wrote:TYGEM is popular because of Bat's lectures

No.

skydyr wrote:

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

If you are getting absolutely crushed and your opponent loses their internet connection (say the power goes out), should you get a win? That seems more bizarre to me.

It may also discourage sandbagging by helping to ensure that ranks stay relatively accurate.

I didn't defend that position either, but it is certainly more understandable that the leaver might get an undeserved loss than whoever wanted to continue the game.
If that was implemented in Go servers the easiest way to increase our ranks would be to just study the fuseki. We would play 40 moves "optimally", get an advantage and then leave, let the bot play the rest.

uPWarrior wrote:

skydyr wrote:

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

If you are getting absolutely crushed and your opponent loses their internet connection (say the power goes out), should you get a win? That seems more bizarre to me.

It may also discourage sandbagging by helping to ensure that ranks stay relatively accurate.

I didn't defend that position either, but it is certainly more understandable that the leaver might get an undeserved loss than whoever wanted to continue the game.
If that was implemented in Go servers the easiest way to increase our ranks would be to just study the fuseki. We would play 40 moves "optimally", get an advantage and then leave, let the bot play the rest.

I don't think that having the bot play the rest to absolutely determine the outcome is a good idea until the late endgame, at the very least. If one were to go with a bot (a dubious idea) I think it might make more sense to require a predicted win by a certain score, which could go down as rank increases and which also would allow games to be voided if the result is not clear. Say a 50-75 point win for beginners and working down from there, on the assumption that as one gets stronger one is less likely to make very swingy mistakes?

EDIT: The size of the required botplay win would probably need to change depending on how late in the game it is as well.

Just to be clear, I also don't think that this is the best solution for this, but it is A solution for those who complain that they are cheated when people abandon games, or that escapers need to be disincentivised.

vpopovic wrote:Oh Lord, won't you buy me a programming skills?

Speaking of programming skills: I don't know why, but a nice exercise comes to my mind:

Write a program that determines for the L19x19 forums:
1. How many posts does it take (on average) in a thread after the first appearance of the string 'KGS' until the string 'escaper' appears?
2. And what is the percentage of threads where this does not happen?

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

what makes you think you've been labeled the loser?

SpongeBob wrote:

vpopovic wrote:Oh Lord, won't you buy me a programming skills?

Speaking of programming skills: I don't know why, but a nice exercise comes to my mind:

Write a program that determines for the L19x19 forums:
1. How many posts does it take (on average) in a thread after the first appearance of the string 'KGS' until the string 'escaper' appears?
2. And what is the percentage of threads where this does not happen?

I think the Escapers issue is the equivalent our "Hitler" in a the lifein19x19's version of Godwin's Law

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godwin's_law

We can set it up like

"As a discussion about KGS grows longer, the probability of talking of escapers approaches 1"

uPWarrior wrote: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?

hyperpape wrote:

uPWarrior wrote: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.