Why KGS encourages escapes and how to fix it

[daal]

Regarding server popularity, you are only considering english-based servers. Try using Tygem's desktop client, and you will aee the volume of chat. Yeah, it is not in English mostly, but that's beside the point.

I wasn't only talking about English servers. When I log onto Tygem, what I usually read is something like betting game in room x or soandso is teaching in room y. Other than that, I've often seen someone just deliberately flooding the chat box - but then again, the English client doesn't let you see or write asian characters, so I guess I'm probably missing something.

[Kirby]

Regarding server popularity, you are only considering english-based servers. Try using Tygem's desktop client, and you will aee the volume of chat. Yeah, it is not in English mostly, but that's beside the point.

I wasn't only talking about English servers. When I log onto Tygem, what I usually read is something like betting game in room x or soandso is teaching in room y. Other than that, I've often seen someone just deliberately flooding the chat box - but then again, the English client doesn't let you see or write asian characters, so I guess I'm probably missing something.

It probably makes a difference if you can see the Asian characters, yes. Added to that, there are several different servers you can log into, and you need a paid account to be guaranteed access to some of the more popular servers. The number of users is magnitudes larger than on KGS, but this is likely at least partially due to the popularity of go in Asia.

Anyway, all the talk about escapers is just hypothetical to me anyway. Like I said above, practically speaking, KGS is a fun server to play on. It's just that, to me, if we have the concept of ranked games with time limits, the idea of allowing for a disconnect without penalty just doesn't compute. It's like saying that 2+2 is five.

Despite this, escapers are infrequent enough for me that this is like arguing about the color of the green canvas.

[adsfadfaf]

escapers are very common against me. The additional effect of this is that I worry about people escaping when I am gaining a lead, this takes a lot of fun out of playing for me.

I am confused at all the people mentioning that they have dodgy internet connections: I was suggesting an option that would allow games to be forfeit 1 day or 1 week or so after a disconnection. This means you could still reconnect to finish the game, or not select the option if you think you might take longer than a week to resume it.

I guess nothing will happen about it which is a shame, it's too bad that the idea of having an option seems to be confused by most people so the idea has got very little support. Let me reiterate: My suggestion would have no negative effect on people who enjoy the current system, and it would have a positive effect on those who have problems with escapers.

[Kirby]

escapers are very common against me. The additional effect of this is that I worry about people escaping when I am gaining a lead, this takes a lot of fun out of playing for me.

I am confused at all the people mentioning that they have dodgy internet connections: I was suggesting an option that would allow games to be forfeit 1 day or 1 week or so after a disconnection. This means you could still reconnect to finish the game, or not select the option if you think you might take longer than a week to resume it.

I guess nothing will happen about it which is a shame, it's too bad that the idea of having an option seems to be confused by most people so the idea has got very little support. Let me reiterate: My suggestion would have no negative effect on people who enjoy the current system, and it would have a positive effect on those who have problems with escapers.

Don't worry. I support your idea

[hyperpape]

So ideally, the software could allow for both the option of playing a "resumable game" and for playing one with no possible escaping (as defined above).

Wms does that. He calls it "Tygem".

To be sure, I use that option periodically

But it's not part of the software.

And if it was, it wouldn't be

That is, if there's an option to have games with strict handling of disconnects, then you end up with one population of players who plays that way the vast majority of the time, and another population that plays the opposite way the vast majority of the time. Or maybe one wins out and the de facto standard is that KGS stays the way it is, or that it becomes like Tygem. Or worse, you could have confusion where tons of people don't understand the options and don't know what they're getting.

I really think that each server needs to pick its policy.

[averell]

escapers are very common against me. The additional effect of this is that I worry about people escaping when I am gaining a lead, this takes a lot of fun out of playing for me.

I am confused at all the people mentioning that they have dodgy internet connections: I was suggesting an option that would allow games to be forfeit 1 day or 1 week or so after a disconnection. This means you could still reconnect to finish the game, or not select the option if you think you might take longer than a week to resume it.

I guess nothing will happen about it which is a shame, it's too bad that the idea of having an option seems to be confused by most people so the idea has got very little support. Let me reiterate: My suggestion would have no negative effect on people who enjoy the current system, and it would have a positive effect on those who have problems with escapers.

You are not the first to have this idea. For example on chess servers like ICC and FICS there is a "noescape" flag, which you can turn on, to only be paired with players who also have this flag set. Then all disconnections result in loss.

The problem is, that the majority of players would turn this on, which in effect will disable the current escaper system. But KGS is not supposed to be a democracy, and the majority is not supposed to make this decision (this even makes some sort of sense, because most people have good internet). That is why even your "compromise" cannot be implemented.

Additionally this is would be a new feature, and KGS is not actively being developed, because the little time WMS has is spent on a new web-based version of the client.

[Kirby]

...

That is, if there's an option to have games with strict handling of disconnects, then you end up with one population of players who plays that way the vast majority of the time, and another population that plays the opposite way the vast majority of the time. Or maybe one wins out and the de facto standard is that KGS stays the way it is, or that it becomes like Tygem. Or worse, you could have confusion where tons of people don't understand the options and don't know what they're getting.

I really think that each server needs to pick its policy.

Yeah, chaos would ensue! Imagine if the server even decided to have the option for SOME games to be ranked, whereas SOME were not ranked. Or worse yet, they could allow for SOME fast time settings and some slow!

After time, people might be playing all rated games. Or maybe all fast games. The horror!

[Kirby]

...

Additionally this is would be a new feature, and KGS is not actively being developed, because the little time WMS has is spent on a new web-based version of the client.

More than any other point, this is the reason.

[Kirby]

...

The problem is, that the majority of players would turn this on, which in effect will disable the current escaper system. ...

Seems to suggest something, does it not?

[hyperpape]

I think your argument fails on multiple levels. Rated vs. unrated, short vs. fast time settings are essential features of a go server. As you admit, your option is not. Why does that matter? Every option imposes some degree of cognitive load on users. For the most important options, it's obviously worth it. Also, the difference between rated and unrated games or fast and slow rated games have simple, obvious meanings. Your flag? Less so. In most games where it's set, it has no effect whatsoever. Every so often, it matters. Thus, users' expectations are more likely to be confounded, they're less likely to check, and so on.

[hyperpape]

...

The problem is, that the majority of players would turn this on, which in effect will disable the current escaper system. ...

Seems to suggest something, does it not?

The average chess player would cheat and rob his mother blind if he could get away with it?

[averell]

...

The problem is, that the majority of players would turn this on, which in effect will disable the current escaper system. ...

Seems to suggest something, does it not?

It does. And i would also vote for it, because i think the current policy does more harm than good. But not because the majority wants this. The majority would also not want to pay for disabled access anywhere. Or just turn your TV on to confirm: just because most people like something doesn't make it good.

Of course in this particular issue our benevolent leader is misguided...

[jts]

asfdadfasdf, are you the player who plays under a similar name as a guest in the English Game Room from time to time? Because we can't lump into one category the problems of guests and the problems of registered players. For a variety of reasons registered players prefer to play other registered players. which leaves guests playing other guests, who are mostly not good members of the KGS community.

[Kirby]

I think your argument fails on multiple levels.

Sure you do. It's something being said by me, after all...

Rated vs. unrated, short vs. fast time settings are essential features of a go server.

I disagree. It's entirely feasible to have a server that doesn't support time limits. It's entirely possible to have a server that doesn't have a ranking system.

It just so happens that time settings and a rating system are more universally popular features of a go server. Despite this, I feel that there is a large amount of support for a "no escaper" option.

Why does that matter? Every option imposes some degree of cognitive load on users.

I totally agree. There are two disadvantages to adding an option for "no escapers":
1.) Increased system complexity - I mentioned this earlier. Any feature in a software system increases its complexity, and I agree that adding this one would, too. To be honest, I would prefer for there not to be an option at all, and for it to default to the "no escapers" option. As I said before, it does not make sense to me that someone can leave a rated game periodically without having it affect their rating. As I see it, the current implementation is a bug, even though it seems to be a conscious decision.

2.) Time to implement - KGS is a pretty good place for playing go as it is, and wms has done us benefit by providing it to us. Escapers are not super common for me, so I personally still find it worth it to play on KGS even though I see the current escaper implementation as a bug. So in this argument, I am not really pushing for a new feature to be added. I am only arguing for an idealistic scenario (given zero implementation time or cost, etc.).

Also, the difference between rated and unrated games or fast and slow rated games have simple, obvious meanings. Your flag? Less so. In most games where it's set, it has no effect whatsoever. Every so often, it matters. Thus, users' expectations are more likely to be confounded, they're less likely to check, and so on.

Yep, I'd prefer not to have a flag, too. I'd prefer to default to having no escapers. But it is clear from these discussions that there exist people that like both methods of dealing with escapers. Hence, I feel it is a good candidate for a user-selectable option.

More than anything else I've said, I think it really comes down to the fact that I cannot comprehend the idea of a rated game that is optionally rated, depending on whether or not someone wants to escape.

[oren]

More than anything else I've said, I think it really comes down to the fact that I cannot comprehend the idea of a rated game that is optionally rated, depending on whether or not someone wants to escape.

I think the problem I have with your system is I would lose more games as an escaper than I would have games with no results due to escapers.