My €0.02 on this debate:
Go is not the same game that it used to be - especially now that the majority of games (I would guess) happen over the internet. The ritual and habits associated with the game are vanishing now that it's perfectly possible to learn to play without ever sitting down with a Goban and a teacher. It is this 'old' approach which used to set Go apart from other games, giving it the tradition, the etiquette and air of 'respect'. In most other games, I think it's fairly rare for anyone to consider any legal play as 'rude'*. I think that this kind of detachment is the sort of attitude that will develop towards Go, and much as it might frustrate you, I don't think you'll be able to change it - just as I won't be able to get people to stop playing za, aa, ag, oi and oy in scrabble. I will just have to learn to live with it.
Here's a question: When you are playing online as black, do you still commence play in the top right hand corner of the board? It is both pointless to do this online, and irrelevant to the origin of the custom which (as I understand it) is designed to make it physically more comfortable for your opponent to play their first move with their right hand. Would you consider it impolite if another player
didn't play there as black? Another example: In a face-to-face game with me, would you play in my near left corner, even though I am left handed, and my stones are there? Ought I to consider that impolite?
Blindly following custom without understanding is not respectful - and nor is it always harmless, hence the proverb about learning joseki and dropping two stones. People playing moves without understanding the rationale behind them are liable to run in to trouble. This leads on to another thing which frustrates me - people's dislike of "trick" moves. If you learn a certain joseki, but neglect to learn possible 'trick' moves associated with it, who are you to dictate what moves should and shouldn't be played? If your opponent does not have the skill to refute a hamete, then it was the correct move for you - and if they
do have the skill, then you judged the situation wrongly, and you will lose out through playing an incorrect move. I can't see any rudeness there.
Would anybody consider it rude if black played like this?
http://gobase.org/studying/articles/miyamoto/Would you avoid playing in an opponent's territory or group if you were pretty sure it was safe? Why? Perhaps it's different at my level (ddk) than for a dan player, but there are too many permutations inside large groups or on long disjointed walls for the players to be able to see them all - so what's the harm in trying? Blindly expecting your opponent to match your ability and/or defend correctly is one way to concede a game before you have started-if they can read as well as you, and do everything else as well as you, then you won't win, will you? Any handicap game requires overplay from white or mistakes from black, and it's hard to think of a way to win a game that doesn't involve wrong moves from the loser at some point.
There are many ways to win games - run out of time, killing your opponent's group, invading their moyo, making better use of enclosing moves, making tactical use of combinations of attacks to build territory while reducing your opponent's - or making fewer mistakes than your opponent. There is
always the possibility that a player will make mistakes - trying to deny that is futile, and NOT giving your opponent as many opportunities as possible to make mistakes is, I would suggest, one way to play badly.
If you are not comfortable with the clock being a factor, then don't play blitz or sudden death games, and play unlimited time instead. If you play blitz, I think it's quite inconsiderate and unrealistic to expect (your opponent) to play exactly as you (they) would without the time constraint. You can't spend time reading life and death, so you go for something more secure, at the expense of sente or slightly bigger moves. Just as one strives to play less complicated situations with one's own groups, it's perfectly reasonable to pressure your opponent in to more complex situations, in the dual hope that they will either a) make a mistake or b) run out of time. It's not part of Go per se, but it is part of the
gameWhile trying to actually think of what I
would find rude, I decided that I would find it rude (although quite amusing) if my opponent's only goal was to draw rude pictures with go stones; other than that, there is no way I would consider a legal move to be rude. If they started licking all the black stones in my set while muttering "Mmmmm, Minstrels", I'd probably be offended. Once, at my local club, someone managed to cop off with a rather drunken lady during a game. I think that was a bit rude to his opponent.
*The closest analogy I can think of in football is for your opponent to start doing kick-ups in the corner during a match. In a way it's disrespectful, but it's a perfectly valid tactic, and by getting worked up about it or not being able to get the ball, you are simply showing your own deficiencies.
Football also has valid tactics for time-wasting, which are regularly employed as every game is time-limited. It is perfectly reasonable to use most of these tactics - and those that aren't legal will be punished. Simple as. It's
frustrating, but it's not
rude.