Life In 19x19

Go_Japan wrote:1) I think we should feel freer to play others outside the class you are in. It seems to me that there are no rules about who you can play with, if you do not need to get a point. In other words, if I am sitting online and no one from my class is available, why not just play with anyone who is available? We could play a rated game, a teaching game, or a free game.
Why should I go back to the English Room when there are like 30+ players logged into ASR without a game? I think if we make a clear policy that there are no penalties or restrictions on playing games in ASR outside of league games, that would help foster a greater community among us.
In addition, if a class member comes on, you can always ask your opponent to post-pone the game and go play a league game. The non-league games could be continued later or abandoned depending on whether it is a rated game or not.

What exactly is stopping you from playing a game against whoever in the ASR? Afaik, it's totally fine to do so, it just won't give you league points if the person isn't in your class. Or are you trying to say the ASR should be more explicit in that this activity is okay?

2) It would be great if we could have an ASR space on the boards, where people could introduce themselves privately. Perhaps a child board that only ASR members can access.

Isn't this thread in one? I don't see any benefits in restricting a subforum such that only ASR members can access it; actually I think it'd do more harm than good as it shuts out interested people.

3) Perhaps you could create an ASR fan page on facebook or something to increase the community beyond KGS. Even KGS does not have a fan page, and it probably should.

This should be easy enough, as there is already an ASR (and KGS) group; an admin over those groups should be able to upgrade the group with ease (as I did for the Igo Hatsuyoron group, which changed into a fan page).

First of all, if you take issue with my initial goal of creating a greater community within ASR, then all the following points are irrelevant to you. All the points I make below are focused on creating a greater sense of community in ASR.

Araban wrote:What exactly is stopping you from playing a game against whoever in the ASR? Afaik, it's totally fine to do so, it just won't give you league points if the person isn't in your class. Or are you trying to say the ASR should be more explicit in that this activity is okay?

I know that I can do this. What I see is that people are not doing this. So, somehow, it would be good to encourage this more. Perhaps making it clear that you can play games in the league room that do not give points would help. I do not know if it would or not.
When I am logged in, I see like 30-50 people in ASR room and between zero and 2 games in the room. If I click on some members of my class, they are playing games in English or other rooms. This is my observation and it is strange to me when there are 30-50 players in the room.

Isn't this thread in one? I don't see any benefits in restricting a subforum such that only ASR members can access it; actually I think it'd do more harm than good as it shuts out interested people.

Either i wasn't clear or you misunderstand. I am talking about a place where ASR people can introduce themselves to other ASR people without making that information too public. In other words, create a space in addition to this space that is for ASR people only. I am not suggesting to make this space private. I am only suggesting to make a new private space for members only. I have been part of other on-line gaming communities before. One of the best ways to generate a community is to create community-only space.

This should be easy enough, as there is already an ASR (and KGS) group; an admin over those groups should be able to upgrade the group with ease (as I did for the Igo Hatsuyoron group, which changed into a fan page).

That is interesting because when i do a search on facebook for KGS or Kiseido I cannot find it. KGS has a bunch of hits with very few members, except for one private group. There are tons of pages of results, though, I thought it would be easier to find. ASR is the same, with a lot of results and few members. Perhaps KGS and ASR are there, but with a bunch of other groups with the same name, it is difficult to find them without clicking through a hundred different groups.
All I found was a KGS Information page.
I know the search in Facebook sucks, so maybe you can just post the links to those pages here so people know they exist and can join if they want.

Anyway, like I said, if people think that the problem with ASR is within the structure, they try to fix the rules. If people think that the problem is creating a greater sense of community than perhaps these suggestions will help.

First of all, if you take issue with my initial goal of creating a greater community within ASR, then all the following points are irrelevant to you. All the points I make below are focused on creating a greater sense of community in ASR.

Why are you being so defensive? I'm just trying to gain a clearer understanding of what you're trying to suggest.

I know that I can do this. What I see is that people are not doing this. So, somehow, it would be good to encourage this more. Perhaps making it clear that you can play games in the league room that do not give points would help. I do not know if it would or not.
When I am logged in, I see like 30-50 people in ASR room and between zero and 2 games in the room. If I click on some members of my class, they are playing games in English or other rooms. This is my observation and it is strange to me when there are 30-50 players in the room.

So basically just make it more explicit and encouraging it rather than not saying anything at all; got it.

Either i wasn't clear or you misunderstand. I am talking about a place where ASR people can introduce themselves to other ASR people without making that information too public. In other words, create a space in addition to this space that is for ASR people only. I am not suggesting to make this space private. I am only suggesting to make a new private space for members only. I have been part of other on-line gaming communities before. One of the best ways to generate a community is to create community-only space.

So basically an ASR forum, got it.

That is interesting because when i do a search on facebook for KGS or Kiseido I cannot find it. KGS has a bunch of hits with very few members, except for one private group. There are tons of pages of results, though, I thought it would be easier to find. ASR is the same, with a lot of results and few members. Perhaps KGS and ASR are there, but with a bunch of other groups with the same name, it is difficult to find them without clicking through a hundred different groups.
All I found was a KGS Information page.
I know the search in Facebook sucks, so maybe you can just post the links to those pages here so people know they exist and can join if they want.

stalkor is going to try and get the creator of the ASR group to turn the group page into a fan page as only the creator has this privilege. Once it turns into a fan page, it should be easier to find; but no worries, an explicit link should be posted in the ASR channel.

Araban wrote:

First of all, if you take issue with my initial goal of creating a greater community within ASR, then all the following points are irrelevant to you. All the points I make below are focused on creating a greater sense of community in ASR.

Why are you being so defensive? I'm just trying to gain a clearer understanding of what you're trying to suggest.

Sorry, it is the nature of my job. I misunderstood your tone.
Thanks for the response.

Thanks GoJapan for your interesting ideas, and thanks Araban for helping to clarify them!

I like the idea of developing the ASR community. I've been a member for a few months now but beyond buddying people with whom I've had a good experience, I haven't been able to make much happen as far as building on these contacts. Encouraging games in the room but outside the league, as well as offering a forum where players could get to know one another a bit better might help.

I only joined a few days ago, so take my comments accordingly. I have been on a few hours each day and have yet to see anyone from my group. I may be somewhat more limited than others in that I mostly have the time in the evening after my kids go to bed to try to play, but I have also tried looking during my lunch break at work without success. I may not be the target audience for the league, perhaps I should be looking into something like the DGS based league instead. However, I have two thoughts :

1) Ask people when they sign up what hours/days they are usually available and divide players accordingly. I'm going to see what I can do this weekend, but if I can't find games that fit my schedule then either I'll probably just give up on ASR without ever getting a game. Perhaps I should have anticipated this when I was trying to sign up for nearly a week and never saw an admin. The room is reasonably active when I'm there, so it would seem like it should be possible to arrange things so games are available.

2) Provide a turn-based option. Finishing turned based games within a month requires faster time controls than normal for those servers, and people willing to make several move each day. I am on pace to finish several games on DGS in less than a month, so it is possible. However, that seems to be happening in games where my opponent is awake roughly the same time I am so we can play 10-15 moves in a day. This may have the same problems if the players are on different continents and so can only play one move each daily.

Another option would be to let the games be longer when turn based, just count a player's record based on games finished in a given month. If can play one move daily in 20 games that should translate to around 10 games/month, well above the league minimum.

Kevin

it's sad to hear about you not able to find games (i've looked at your previous game records and yes, that time of the day is very quiet since all europeans are asleep and most americans just turned in for bed). That does not mean is not meant for you, instead, everyone who wants to play serious games and learn is our target audience.

The idea of playing more non league games in the ASR is very good idea and i hope that everyone who reads this will think of doing that when there are no players online from your class. We are still working on the new site (this will take a while) and we have the idea of the scheduling already in mind so i guess you have to wait for it. the new site will also have a place to introduce yourself and such:)

also the idea of turnbased is something im not in favor of. we have DGS for it and KGS is not made for such a thing.

I have read the intro and the league rules and the FAQ. I have also read through various of the posts here and logged onto the the ASR room and checked the action. I have not found a clear statement on why you think the league structure achieves the ASR goals. As far as I can see the current league structure artificially restricts the opportunities to play and is the primary reason for people being dissatisfied. The structure looks nice when it is presented in a graphic, but it does not seem to work. If you sat down today with a blank piece of paper and thought about how to achieve the stated goals of the ASR, what could be done better?

ez4u wrote:I have read the intro and the league rules and the FAQ. I have also read through various of the posts here and logged onto the the ASR room and checked the action. I have not found a clear statement on why you think the league structure achieves the ASR goals. As far as I can see the current league structure artificially restricts the opportunities to play and is the primary reason for people being dissatisfied. The structure looks nice when it is presented in a graphic, but it does not seem to work. If you sat down today with a blank piece of paper and thought about how to achieve the stated goals of the ASR, what could be done better?

I think it's worth noting that while the league structure may in some ways restrict opportunities to play, this is far outweighed by the opportunities it creates - namely the opportunity to play even games with stronger players. Barring some prior personal relationship, I think that this is pretty rare on KGS. The ASR has in fact created an atmosphere in which many hundreds of such games are played each month. This is not to say that there is no room for improvement, but stalkor and co. have been listening to the criticisms and implementing new ideas in response. I don't think the situation is dire.

daal wrote:

ez4u wrote:I have read the intro and the league rules and the FAQ. I have also read through various of the posts here and logged onto the the ASR room and checked the action. I have not found a clear statement on why you think the league structure achieves the ASR goals. As far as I can see the current league structure artificially restricts the opportunities to play and is the primary reason for people being dissatisfied. The structure looks nice when it is presented in a graphic, but it does not seem to work. If you sat down today with a blank piece of paper and thought about how to achieve the stated goals of the ASR, what could be done better?

I think it's worth noting that while the league structure may in some ways restrict opportunities to play, this is far outweighed by the opportunities it creates - namely the opportunity to play even games with stronger players. Barring some prior personal relationship, I think that this is pretty rare on KGS. The ASR has in fact created an atmosphere in which many hundreds of such games are played each month. This is not to say that there is no room for improvement, but stalkor and co. have been listening to the criticisms and implementing new ideas in response. I don't think the situation is dire.

I honestly think you are posting in the wrong topic. Please refer to stalkor's original question. This is not the place where you congratulate everyone on the good points. It is exactly where you address his question, "What is the ASR doing wrong?"

ez4u wrote:I have read the intro and the league rules and the FAQ. I have also read through various of the posts here and logged onto the the ASR room and checked the action. I have not found a clear statement on why you think the league structure achieves the ASR goals. As far as I can see the current league structure artificially restricts the opportunities to play and is the primary reason for people being dissatisfied. The structure looks nice when it is presented in a graphic, but it does not seem to work. If you sat down today with a blank piece of paper and thought about how to achieve the stated goals of the ASR, what could be done better?

What about the league structure artificially restricts opportunities to play?

We could say, "all right, everyone in the ASR should play someone else in the ASR. And... Go!" But people need a little bit more structure and ritual to feel comfortable bothering each other about games. The exact size of the divisions is to balance ease of finding games, on the one hand, with giving a slight edge to people who win most of their games, on the other. (When the big complaint isn't "I can never get any games" it's "Everyone else is playing too many games, there's no way I can catch up even if I beat most of them.")

I honestly think you are posting in the wrong topic. Please refer to stalkor's original question. This is not the place where you congratulate everyone on the good points. It is exactly where you address his question, "What is the ASR doing wrong?"

I think there was a time when stalkor was irrationally pessimistic about the future of the league on the basis of meaningless month-to-month variations in membership.

Yes there was a time when i took a break from managing (because i wasnt having fun anymore) to get my stuff together and do some personal things.

when i came back almost 3 months later i found the league had gone back from 400+ to about 200 players so my first reaction was a bit like "AAHHHH wth is happening!!" so i made this thread, which was a bit overreacting on my part in hindsight and i posted in this very thread too.

that said ez4u has an opinion about the league and how we try to reach our goals, which should be fundamental to how we do things in the ASR.

I still think we are doing a good job in making a competitive league with opportunities for every strength to get a chance of winning and creating a place for ppl to play serious games and learn from them.

Yes, we can do more about the learning part, but it's one of the hardest things to get someone to do lectures on a regular basis and get him/her to want to keep doing this (without getting paid for, since we have no steady income of course). Tabemasu tried but it didn't last for a long time.

Also the league is not made to replace all your games you play on KGS. You should play a league game when you can and want to, but if there is no one online to play you shouldnt wait endlessly for one to get online, you should just play someone else in the room or play somewhere else like the EGR. Also keep in mind it's a casual league with different kinds of ppl like players who play 4 games per month or play 60 games per month.

Let me elaborate a bit. First my POV. I am one of the people in the Asian time zones. About a year ago I read about the ASR and joined the room to lurk and see how it worked. In Asian time it basically doesn't - not enough games.

When I wrote that the system artificially limits the opportunities to play, I meant that out of perhaps 300 league members, your serious games are limited to the other members of your class, say 20 people or so. The reason that I used the term artificial is that the assignment to classes does not appear to be designed in any way to promote finding games. This is despite the fact that it appears to be recognized as a serious issue. The September news says:
"Over one third of you guys didnt make the 4 game minimum but you guys still managed to play almost 1100 games, which makes me very proud considering it was harder to find a game."

Pride is nice, but wouldn't it be even nicer to announce that 2000 games were played and that over 90% of the members exceeded their 4-game minimum? If the answer is yes, then the question is what does it take to make the league structure more supportive of finding games. Since from the results charts it is clear that not everyone plays everyone else anyway, why are the class sizes what they are? If beta were a band of 40 players rather than two classes of 20 and if gamma were a band of 80 players rather than four classes, what difference would it make?

Right now it is about 9 PM Sunday evening in Japan, which I would consider prime time. There are five games going on. That is possibly the most I have seen at one time (then again maybe not, I haven't been checking for months). Five games means that only five (max. assuming no duplicates) of the classes have a game going on.

I would also say that the league as currently organized is not based on competition. It simply is not competitive for people more than a few ranks apart to compete in even games (unless someone is misranked! ) The actual results in the league are not based on improvement but mainly on activity. The intro states:
"...the points system strongly rewards activity – you get half as many points for losing as you do for winning, so you can easily achieve a good class position with a poor record just by playing a lot of games – the reason for this? We want people to improve as quickly as possible, and the motivation to play more games helps to achieve this..."

I assume that currently your won-loss ratio is pretty much determined by the makeup of your class - how many people in your class are seriously stronger than you are and how many are weaker. From there is should be a relatively simple matter to determine how much activity is necessary to advance. However, how does that support the idea of playing serious games? My idea of a serious game is one with an evenly matched opponent where the result has some meaning. In order to promote serious play, it would seem necessary to put people of a similar rank together. Of course this raises the issue of how to review the resulting games. You would like to have someone stronger to review with. The current idea in the league is that you do this by playing with the stronger players. However, as some people have commented, the stronger players do not necessarily find this interesting. One alternative would be to try to structure the league so that the stronger players come to play serious games against each other but then also hang out to review games with weaker players. I think that may be more interesting for both the stronger and weaker members. It may be possible to arrange and then announce when certain crowd favorites will be around. This could also end up causing more activity to center around such times.

Just a few thoughts...

ez4u, I believe most ASR players like that there is a mix of ranks. I see the ASR mainly as a vehicle for me to play even games with stronger players, and get a review; then I reciprocate by playing even games with weaker players, and giving them reviews. When I play other 4kyu, I feel kind of silly... like I'm just playing for the points. If all the players in my division were my level, there wouldn't be much purpose in being part of the ASR. (You could say that I see it as a teaching ladder with the narrative form of a tournament.)

As you say, this screws over the strongest players. But they're already (relatively) strong at go, so I say unto ye, verily, ye have had your reward.

jts wrote:ez4u, I believe most ASR players like that there is a mix of ranks. I see the ASR mainly as a vehicle for me to play even games with stronger players, and get a review; then I reciprocate by playing even games with weaker players, and giving them reviews. When I play other 4kyu, I feel kind of silly... like I'm just playing for the points. If all the players in my division were my level, there wouldn't be much purpose in being part of the ASR. (You could say that I see it as a teaching ladder with the narrative form of a tournament.)

As you say, this screws over the strongest players. But they're already (relatively) strong at go, so I say unto ye, verily, ye have had your reward.

Careful, I don't think I said it screws over the strongest players. They are there by choice. However, I do think it will bore them and IIRC some have said so in their posts here as the reason they dropped out. At the other end of the spectrum, I see some people in the results table that are losing 19 out of 20 games. Now perhaps they are taking each of those games seriously and I am just lacking in imagination, but I really can't get my head around the mix of games produced by the current class structure as the best way of facilitating "advanced study". Of course I have only opinions, unsupported by real facts, about what might be done differently.