Life In 19x19

topazg wrote:I really disagree Kirby. I reserve the right to play ranked games for casual fun, and not particularly care about the result or the effect on my rank. In the game itself, I'm not going to start self atari-ing my groups or playing on 1-1 points, I'm still going to try to win. But, my rank helps me get games too, and I'm not going to deny myself that on a whim.

I have 5 kids running around half the time, and the ability to sit down for an hour to just play isn't that rare, but nor are interruptions that pull me away for what could be a long time. I leave my clock running when I go, and although I'll try to get back and carry on, if it times out, I lose. As a result, I lose rank if/when this happens, but the flipside of never playing a ranked game is a lot worse in the other direction from my perspective.

But you are not escaping. If you have some other factor that leads you to lose the game, and you lose the game because of it, then the result is appropriately allocated.

If you were in the same scenario, but were to escape when one of your kids were running around, then I do not think that it would be justified for you not to get a loss for the game.

If you do not want a loss in such a scenario, you can play a free game. But if you care about such a loss, you should not use escaping as a means to avoid it.

Kirby wrote:

Bantari wrote:...
Not really. It seems you did not understand a word I wrote.
I don't care - so why should I bother?
...

You should bother because other people on the server care.

This is silly.
If I bothered and worried about every single thing people around me bother and worry - I would go nuts!

Just because YOU care about rank, does not mean everybody should.
please do not try to force your personal philosophy onto others, its really bad taste.

There is specific functionality designed for people that do not care about the result of the game. It's called the "Free Game" option.

You are mixing things here.
Free games and caring about game results are two completely different things.
I see in your mind a result of the game is only important if it contributes to ratings.
Well - this is your sad opinion, one that I personally do not share. And guess what - you can't make me.

And, by the way - the FREE GAME option is not designed for people who do not care about rank.
It is designed for people who DO care, but do not want this particular game to affect their rank.
Seriously - I could never understand that very much. Seems silly to me... unless you are rank obsessed and only want the 'good' games to count for you. But guess what - this is EXACTLY the thinking of all of the escapers I ever talked to. This is why they escape - rank matters to them, like it does to you, and they only want the good' games to count.

If you do not care about your rank, this is the option that is designed for you.

There are people that care about rank, whether it be for getting evenly matched games, because they want to measure their improvement, or for some other means. For these scenarios, there is a different option available. It's called the "Rated game" option.

The software is designed such that the user can select the option that is appropriate for them.

Some people do not care one way or the other. If they use the option that is not suited for them, they may not care. But the people that do care may be bothered by this, because they are using the incorrect option - they should be using a "free game", but are instead using a "rated game".

If you don't care about your rank, please do not use the "rated game" feature. Instead, please use the "free game" feature. It's designed for games that do not affect your rank.

No.
I will do what I do, and I am fine with that.
I also believe that the rating system is fine with that.

If you have an issue with me not caring if a game is rated or not, you should deal with that.
It is your personal problem, and I am not qualified to psychoanalyze you.

Well, anyways - I said what I wanted to say, for now.
You have your ways, i have mine. If that bothers you - seek help.

Kirby wrote:

topazg wrote:I really disagree Kirby. I reserve the right to play ranked games for casual fun, and not particularly care about the result or the effect on my rank. In the game itself, I'm not going to start self atari-ing my groups or playing on 1-1 points, I'm still going to try to win. But, my rank helps me get games too, and I'm not going to deny myself that on a whim.

I have 5 kids running around half the time, and the ability to sit down for an hour to just play isn't that rare, but nor are interruptions that pull me away for what could be a long time. I leave my clock running when I go, and although I'll try to get back and carry on, if it times out, I lose. As a result, I lose rank if/when this happens, but the flipside of never playing a ranked game is a lot worse in the other direction from my perspective.

But you are not escaping. If you have some other factor that leads you to lose the game, and you lose the game because of it, then the result is appropriately allocated.

If you were in the same scenario, but were to escape when one of your kids were running around, then I do not think that it would be justified for you not to get a loss for the game.

If you do not want a loss in such a scenario, you can play a free game. But if you care about such a loss, you should not use escaping as a means to avoid it.

Hmmm, I think we may be arguing at cross purposes. Have you taken from Bantari's text that he feels it's quite acceptable to escape whenever he feels like it in a game?

topazg wrote:...

Hmmm, I think we may be arguing at cross purposes. Have you taken from Bantari's text that he feels it's quite acceptable to escape whenever he feels like it in a game?

Yes, that is what I believe the discussion is about. Though Bantari does not care about the result of a game, I do not feel that it is justification to escape. If he wants to have the freedom of leaving freely, I think he should at least play a free game. That's because other people DO care about the ranking system, and are bothered when such an escape happens (though it sounds to me that you care less about the ranking system than about closure).

However, I do agree with hyperpape that a free game still has some sort of commitment, so in that case, it would still be best to resign.

topazg wrote:

Kirby wrote:

topazg wrote:I really disagree Kirby. I reserve the right to play ranked games for casual fun, and not particularly care about the result or the effect on my rank. In the game itself, I'm not going to start self atari-ing my groups or playing on 1-1 points, I'm still going to try to win. But, my rank helps me get games too, and I'm not going to deny myself that on a whim.

I have 5 kids running around half the time, and the ability to sit down for an hour to just play isn't that rare, but nor are interruptions that pull me away for what could be a long time. I leave my clock running when I go, and although I'll try to get back and carry on, if it times out, I lose. As a result, I lose rank if/when this happens, but the flipside of never playing a ranked game is a lot worse in the other direction from my perspective.

But you are not escaping. If you have some other factor that leads you to lose the game, and you lose the game because of it, then the result is appropriately allocated.

If you were in the same scenario, but were to escape when one of your kids were running around, then I do not think that it would be justified for you not to get a loss for the game.

If you do not want a loss in such a scenario, you can play a free game. But if you care about such a loss, you should not use escaping as a means to avoid it.

Hmmm, I think we may be arguing at cross purposes. Have you taken from Bantari's text that he feels it's quite acceptable to escape whenever he feels like it in a game?

Just to clarify - I don't like escaping, even though I do not let myself be bothered by them.
In this particular thread - my main point is that you should be bothered or not bothered by escapers regardless if the game is rated or not.
As somebody said - the moral obligation to finish the game is the same regardless of its rated/unrated status. To me those who are ok with escaping in unrated games but screem bloody murder if that happens in rated games simply are too rank-obsessed and actually add to the escaper problem.

Personally - I never ever escape... never did, never will. I resigned a game or two when it was dragging past its expiry date too much, but only once on KGS, for which I got punished and never did that again.

I hope my position is clear now.
Thanks, topazg.

Bantari wrote:...
This is silly.
If I bothered and worried about every single thing people around me bother and worry - I would go nuts!

Just because YOU care about rank, does not mean everybody should.
please do not try to force your personal philosophy onto others, its really bad taste.
...

I do not wish to force any sort of philosophy on you. I simply want you to finish a ranked game if you start one. The purpose of saying that a game is "ranked" is that it will affect one's rank. Escaping such a game to avoid the result is not fair to the person that agreed to play a game that will be counted toward rank.

Of course, you may very well still do this. But it is just abusing the ranked system that is in place on KGS - which is designed to use the game toward calculating rank.

Bantari wrote:...

Just to clarify - I don't like escaping, even though I do not let myself be bothered by them.
In this particular thread - my main point is that you should be bothered or not bothered by escapers regardless if the game is rated or not.
As somebody said - the moral obligation to finish the game is the same regardless of its rated/unrated status. To me those who are ok with escaping in unrated games but screem bloody murder if that happens in rated games simply are too rank-obsessed and actually add to the escaper problem.

Personally - I never ever escape... never did, never will. I resigned a game or two when it was dragging past its expiry date too much, but only once on KGS, for which I got punished and never did that again.

I hope my position is clear now.
Thanks, topazg.

Maybe I misinterpreted your intent. I thought that this discussion was about escapers. I mostly agree with what you have stated here. I also agree that you should take both rated and unrated games just as seriously.

However, the server does make a distinction between rated and free games, so I think that escaping has a greater effect on a rated game in that it affects the rating.

It's true that rating may not be important to everybody. But it's an attribute on the server that's getting messed up when people escape rated games.

The same bad feeling may still exist for free games, of course. But at least the rating is not affected. To some people this makes absolutely no difference. To others, it makes some difference.

Kirby wrote:

Bantari wrote:...

Just to clarify - I don't like escaping, even though I do not let myself be bothered by them.
In this particular thread - my main point is that you should be bothered or not bothered by escapers regardless if the game is rated or not.
As somebody said - the moral obligation to finish the game is the same regardless of its rated/unrated status. To me those who are ok with escaping in unrated games but screem bloody murder if that happens in rated games simply are too rank-obsessed and actually add to the escaper problem.

Personally - I never ever escape... never did, never will. I resigned a game or two when it was dragging past its expiry date too much, but only once on KGS, for which I got punished and never did that again.

I hope my position is clear now.
Thanks, topazg.

Maybe I misinterpreted your intent. I thought that this discussion was about escapers. I mostly agree with what you have stated here. I also agree that you should take both rated and unrated games just as seriously.

However, the server does make a distinction between rated and free games, so I think that escaping has a greater effect on a rated game in that it affects the rating.

It's true that rating may not be important to everybody. But it's an attribute on the server that's getting messed up when people escape rated games.

The same bad feeling may still exist for free games, of course. But at least the rating is not affected. To some people this makes absolutely no difference. To others, it makes some difference.

Ok then.... friends again?

Bantari wrote:...
Ok then.... friends again?

Sure. Let's play a rated game sometime.

Kirby wrote:I am surprised people do not take rated games seriously. I agree that things come up with Internet go, but that should be reflected in your Internet go rating, in my opinion.

If you want to play without the stress of distractions, houses catching on fire, or misclicks... Then, simply play a free game.

I haven't taken rated games seriously for about 5 years.

Kirby wrote:

Javaness2 wrote: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?".

Where does it say that a rated game has to be finished within a set period of time?

One of nice features of KGS was, that it wasn't one of those twitchy servers that decided you were a cheater and resigned for you after 5 minutes. I don't see why people get so furious about being unable to finish a rated game. All you agreed to do was start a rated game, with the expectation of finishing it.

Javaness2 wrote:...
All you agreed to do was start a rated game, with the expectation of finishing it.

...Within the user-specified time settings.

Kirby wrote:

Javaness2 wrote:...
All you agreed to do was start a rated game, with the expectation of finishing it.

...Within the user-specified time settings.

Which include the server policy of being able to leave and finish later?

Javaness2 wrote:

Kirby wrote:

Javaness2 wrote:...
All you agreed to do was start a rated game, with the expectation of finishing it.

...Within the user-specified time settings.

Which include the server policy of being able to leave and finish later?

Yep, that's the policy that I am arguing against. Feel free to argue against time settings on games, if you'd like.

And, by the way, I don't have a problem with being able to leave and finish later. But I believe that this would be perfectly fine if it was mutually agreed upon, like the "undo" feature.

Kirby wrote:Yep, that's the policy that I am arguing against. Feel free to argue against time settings on games, if you'd like.

Well can you tell me what your argument is?