Life In 19x19

SmoothOper wrote:[..] There must be something wrong with you.

You know what?

Maybe you shouldn't go around saying there is something wrong with people [..]

I didn’t read anybody insulting people this way—except in your posts.

People might think you are one of those ELO-sers.

I think you may count yourself lucky that others here are not verbose about what they think of you. (But then again, many of us would probably be banned for a while )

Sheesh …

Tom

DrStraw wrote:Well, KGS does take into account the difference in rating as oppose to rank when recalculating you new rating. That seems good enough for me.

This is a bit of a non-sequitur. I'm talking about how handicaps are determined. I think the KGS rating system makes sense.

Dr Straw wrote:Also, 2k vs 1k is not an even game: it is a one stone game. And 2k vs 1d is two stone game. This is how it has been since before that advent of ratings. Why complicate a simple system by trying to use numbers which are only stored on the computer and not directly visible to the user.

I could have been clearer: this is a hypothetical system of reduced handicaps that is transparent--it only relies on visible numbers. I think it may be used by some AGA tournaments, come to think of it, but whether or not it's been used before, it would partially solve the complaint about handicaps.

SmoothOper wrote:You think this is interesting? There must be something wrong with you.
Maybe you shouldn't go around saying there is something wrong with people when they have a valid argument.

You find me puzzled about this accusation, which is the reason I think you misunderstood what I was saying. When I re-read all our posts, perhaps you thought that my original remark about "reasons" ...

jug wrote:If you don't have interesting games, the reasons are probably lying elsewhere

was referring to YOU personally. I see now & could agree, that that sentence could be understood in an insulting manner, but I assure you that this was not intended. Rather I intended to hint, that the reasons to blame lie in the different server-environments. Sorry for being imprecise there. When you write something, it's often not clear, that it can be ambiguous. Sadly, that's one the disadvantages of text-only communication methods (without seeing the counterpart or hearing the intonations).

If that is not what caused your infuriation, you have to point out to me what you found irritating in my statements.

After seeing about 15 posts bickering about the correct use of terms about "rational/decimal/floating" rank, I thought I add something more substantial to the thread ... which seems to have an unintended opposite effect.

hyperpape wrote:What servers are you thinking of, jug? I think KGS uses nominal ranks for handicaps.

And I think the original complaint makes a lot of sense. Why should the system pair two players with a handicap that it *knows* is larger than is necessary? Surely a too small handicap usually makes slightly more sense than a too large one.

The advantage is that the system is simple to understand, and I guess I'm ok with that. But 2k vs 1k = even, 2k vs 1 dan = 1 stone is also easy to understand.

As one of the developers of DGS I know, that at least DGS uses an even game for a rank-diff of only 0.6k (e.g. see http://www.dragongoserver.net/rating_ch ... 0&komi=6.5 for expected game-settings on DGS for users with a 0.6k rank-diff (need DGS-login e.g. guest-user)).

I think the old OGS was similar, though I'll have to admit I also thought the real-time-servers (IGS, KGS, Tygem, etc) where using ratings (not ranks) ... I guess I was misinformed there. One more reason to dislike such a server-behavior like the OP expressed

jug wrote:

SmoothOper wrote:You think this is interesting? There must be something wrong with you.
Maybe you shouldn't go around saying there is something wrong with people when they have a valid argument.

You find me puzzled about this accusation, which is the reason I think you misunderstood what I was saying. When I re-read all our posts, perhaps you thought that my original remark about "reasons" ...

jug wrote:If you don't have interesting games, the reasons are probably lying elsewhere

was referring to YOU personally. I see now & could agree, that that sentence could be understood in an insulting manner, but I assure you that this was not intended. Rather I intended to hint, that the reasons to blame lie in the different server-environments. Sorry for being imprecise there. When you write something, it's often not clear, that it can be ambiguous. Sadly, that's one the disadvantages of text-only communication methods (without seeing the counterpart or hearing the intonations).

If that is not what caused your infuriation, you have to point out to me what you found irritating in my statements.

After seeing about 15 posts bickering about the correct use of terms about "rational/decimal/floating" rank, I thought I add something more substantial to the thread ... which seems to have an unintended opposite effect.

hyperpape wrote:What servers are you thinking of, jug? I think KGS uses nominal ranks for handicaps.

And I think the original complaint makes a lot of sense. Why should the system pair two players with a handicap that it *knows* is larger than is necessary? Surely a too small handicap usually makes slightly more sense than a too large one.

The advantage is that the system is simple to understand, and I guess I'm ok with that. But 2k vs 1k = even, 2k vs 1 dan = 1 stone is also easy to understand.

As one of the developers of DGS I know, that at least DGS uses an even game for a rank-diff of only 0.6k (e.g. see http://www.dragongoserver.net/rating_ch ... 0&komi=6.5 for expected game-settings on DGS for users with a 0.6k rank-diff (need DGS-login e.g. guest-user)).

I think the old OGS was similar, though I'll have to admit I also thought the real-time-servers (IGS, KGS, Tygem, etc) where using ratings (not ranks) ... I guess I was misinformed there. One more reason to dislike such a server-behavior like the OP expressed

So there was something wrong with you, and how you engage people? I'm just pointing this out so that everyone else can blame you for their wrongness in characterization of myself.

SmoothOper wrote:So there was something wrong with you, and how you engage people?

I think there was an unintended ambiguity in what I said. I apologized for this potential misunderstanding. However I don't think that something is wrong with me or about how I engage people. If you don't accept my apology and think otherwise, that's your prerogative. If you want to continue on this "side-topic" it's probably better to use private messages.

SmoothOper wrote:I'm just pointing this out so that everyone else can blame you for their wrongness in characterization of myself.

Glad to be of service if that ends it.

@admins: Can we please ban SmoothOper already? He's been trolling and insulting people here since forever, and has never contributed anything of value to the forum.

jug wrote:

SmoothOper wrote:So there was something wrong with you, and how you engage people?

I think there was an unintended ambiguity in what I said. I apologized for this potential misunderstanding. However I don't think that something is wrong with me or about how I engage people. If you don't accept my apology and think otherwise, that's your prerogative. If you want to continue on this "side-topic" it's probably better to use private messages.

SmoothOper wrote:I'm just pointing this out so that everyone else can blame you for their wrongness in characterization of myself.

Glad to be of service if that ends it.

Oh, I see when there is something wrong with you, its an unintended ambiguity , when other people aren't clear, something is wrong with them , gotcha . We'll see if anyone else chimes in here, pal.

SmoothOper wrote:Oh, I see when there is something wrong with you, its an unintended ambiguity , when other people aren't clear, something is wrong with them , gotcha . We'll see if anyone else chimes in here, pal.

jug has been respected member of the go community for many years - a developer of DGS. English is not his first language.

...but apparently, you have even more trouble understanding English. I think you're the only one who misunderstood what he was saying here.

HermanHiddema wrote:@admins: Can we please ban SmoothOper already? He's been trolling and insulting people here since forever, and has never contributed anything of value to the forum.

nah, our admins prefer banning Professional Go players who offer to teach us how to play Go.

xed_over wrote:

SmoothOper wrote:Oh, I see when there is something wrong with you, its an unintended ambiguity , when other people aren't clear, something is wrong with them , gotcha . We'll see if anyone else chimes in here, pal.

jug has been respected member of the go community for many years - a developer of DGS. English is not his first language.

...but apparently, you have even more trouble understanding English. I think you're the only one who misunderstood what he was saying here.

There must be something wrong with you xed_over. Which, nationality appreciates that again? Is that one of those European fascist things? No no it is a respected way to behave in a Go community. I laugh. I hope either jug or I get banned because I don't have to put up with this. I hope this comes across with no uncertain ambiguity.

SmoothOper wrote:

xed_over wrote:

SmoothOper wrote:Oh, I see when there is something wrong with you, its an unintended ambiguity , when other people aren't clear, something is wrong with them , gotcha . We'll see if anyone else chimes in here, pal.

jug has been respected member of the go community for many years - a developer of DGS. English is not his first language.

...but apparently, you have even more trouble understanding English. I think you're the only one who misunderstood what he was saying here.

There must be something wrong with you xed_over. Which, nationality appreciates that again? Is that one of those European fascist things? No no it is a respected way to behave in a Go community. I laugh. I hope either jug or I get banned because I don't have to put up with this. I hope this comes across with no uncertain ambiguity.

If I had a vote, it's clear who'd get it.

RBerenguel wrote:
If I had a vote, it's clear who'd get it.

Yeah, if I didn't have explain myself to you again, RB, I definitely wouldn't mind, especially because there is some thing not right with you.

HermanHiddema wrote:@admins: Can we please ban SmoothOper already? He's been trolling and insulting people here since forever, and has never contributed anything of value to the forum.

That's not quite accurate: to start with he purely trolled but more recently he has mixed in some more reasonable behaviour of normal L19 chit-chat*, though of course many times with some off-the-cuff criticism of 4-4 points or traditional handicap placement in an apparent attempt to get his favourite flaming going again.

*for example:
viewtopic.php?f=12&t=10284&p=164805#p164805

The first 6 words are correct and could be classified as adding value, though I'm not sure the rest of the post is accurate...

SmoothOper wrote:

RBerenguel wrote:
If I had a vote, it's clear who'd get it.

Yeah, if I didn't have explain myself to you again, RB, I definitely wouldn't mind, especially because there is some thing not right with you.

Yeah, most things are left with me.

HermanHiddema wrote:@admins: Can we please ban SmoothOper already? He's been trolling and insulting people here since forever, and has never contributed anything of value to the forum.

I’d rather suggest we keep SmoothOper and attach a troll badge to her posts and comments

löl, Tom