Quote:
You claim that there would be a common understanding of ko rules in Asia but the opposite is true
When lacking arguments for discussion, it is a common trick to resort to saying somebody said something they didn't say.
Go has two kinds of rules. There are the rules of play on the board. Although different versions exist, each version can be kept very simple - imperfect but practical and simple.
There are also administrative rules. For example: komi; what to do in void games; time limits; etc, etc.
There is no common understanding of administrative rules even within a single country. Sponsor A (sponsoring say a league) might decide a triple ko is a draw, half a point each. Sponsor B, sponsoring a knockout, might demand a replay with colours reversed. Sponsor C, also sponsoring a knockout, might demand a replay with colours not reversed. Sponsor C, promoting rule change or standardisation, might demand electronic surveillance and a PhD in reading rulesets.
At one time, pro go in Japan had three komis in operation simultaneously: 0. 4.5, 5.0 and 5.5 (and some amateurs used 6.5).
But all these are administrative rules that fall within the bailiwick of sponsors, administrators and professional guilds. They are not the concern of people who buy a beginner's book to see what the game is like, and then spend their lives playing socially if they do like it.
Quote:
You claim to know what common sense and majority of perceiving it were but you don't prove it. You ignore that common sense prefers fewer rules.
Well, it's common sense that I know what common sense is. It's not something you have to prove. But if you are not used to applying common sense, you say daft things like "You ignore that common sense prefers fewer rules," ignoring that is actually what I said (remember the ditching rules comment?) and ignoring that "few" is not the only necessary attribute: we need to add attributes such as simple, understandable, workable....
Here's a simple test to see whether you are using gumption and common sense or you are being driven by intellectual hubris.
You can play go with an opponent entirely in your heads, just relaying the moves (A4, K11 etc). Or you can use a board and stones. Which method would you use? The much cheaper one with fewer components or t'other? Then ask yourself why you made the choice you did.