As you can see, I was getting a lot of criticism for sharing the things I learned about Go on this reddit baduk forum:
https://www.reddit.com/r/baduk/comments ... s_opening/

Therefore I am seeking a place where I dont get so heavily criticized for not being as strong as others.

I don't use Reddit but I understood you were criticized not for being weaker, but for not listening to stronger players' opinions, which are at least as valuable as input from AI.

Who wants to tell him Uberdude is here as well?

Speaking as an admin:
If the referenced thread were to have occurred here on L19, I would not have done anything to stop it.
You were criticized for allegedly misusing an AI and drawing illogical conclusions therefrom. I don't play with AIs enough to know if Uberdude and other posters were correct in their criticism, but their manner of expressing their disagreement would not have broken the rules here.

Speaking as a normal L19 member:
One of the defects common to AIs are the sharp limits of their domains. Go-playing AIs know a lot about go, but almost nothing about go-playing AIs. IOW, they cannot tell you when they are being used in a manner that might draw erroneous conclusions.

_________________
Help make L19 more organized. Make an index: https://lifein19x19.com/viewtopic.php?f=14&t=5207

I don't think it is a nice thing to say "Who wants to tell him Uberdude is here as well?".

And even less about go-playing humans.

I know jack about AIs so I try not to get involved on those threads.All I know in my heart is go is a social event between humans. Bots will suck any enthusiasm you have for go right out of your soul.

It takes thick skin to use reddit. Thicker yet to play go. If one’s ego gets in the way, progress is glacial.

_________________
David Bogie, Boise ID
I play go, I ride a recumbent, of course I use Macintosh.

Not even pros are strong enough to reach 'conclusive' viewpoints in a strict definition of the word. However, as a kyu player to come to such strong conclusions, you may be suffering from the dunning-kruger effect. Of course some commenting may have come across harder than they intended in a way I wouldn't have done if I don't know the person. But why ignore others who tried to say the same thing in a more . . . child-friendly way? At least in my case, I'm serious about knowing where I went wrong when it comes to go so when I started my study journal I deliberately asked people to not hold back. Professional BS-callers like Uberdude are a perfect match for me sadly he's not as active here anymore.

I remember really early on since I had learned go, in what may have been a self-play game or game with a bot, but of course quite a bit before AlphaGo. I invaded at 3-3 under the 4-4 just as these whippersnapper young NN's do these days. I was writing a review of the game and, because strong -player and pro opinion said at the time that it was to early, I wrote, 'this is an embarrassingly early invasion by me', and then tried to find reasons why it was wrong, but I couldn't really. However the idea to go against pro opinion would have been blasphemous to me. Go figure. I mentioned that when my hardrive broke I lost some games and this was one of them

This may apply, but there is another possibility - and others, of course, all of which may be wide of the mark here. Here in Britain we currently talk about "snowflakes" - students who melt under the merest blast of criticism. I don't know whether we have the same phenomenon (and term) in the USA or Europe, but judging by various comments on L19 over the years, I judge it is common among young people everywhere. All part of the Me generation, I suppose.

In my experience, having difficulty accepting criticism gracefully is something that afflicts all generations equally.

I wouldn’t disagree entirely with that as a bald context-free statement. But there is a context, and one aspect of that is degree of criticism accepted. I don’t have a lot of personal experience of youngsters now but my daughter works in a school and I gather teachers now have to walk on eggshells because a B+ instead of an A, or even a stern look, can elicit tears or a threatening parental visit. The result seems to be that pupils hear nothing but praise. I presume that ends up with the D-K effect. In short, pupils are now snowflakes instead of ice cubes.

The other contextual factor is whether it is pure criticism (you have a fat bum) or correction (2+2 = 4, not 5).

I have a hard time accepting criticism. However, I believe the problem is amplified if the criticism is something related to a topic which I view to be related in some way to my identity.

For example, I have little interest in gardening. I still do it from time to time. If someone criticizes the way that I pull weeds, it's a little bit bothersome, but I don't mind that much. It is easier to be accepting of the information, because gardening is a domain that I know little about.

If I am criticized about go, the feeling is much more painful. Especially if it's something I believe that I should know. Being a go-player has become a part of my self-identity, so if I hear criticism related to something I believe I should already know, accepting that criticism leads me to doubt my self-worth and identity.

The logical thing to do would be to objectively evaluate the criticism and learn from it if necessary. But it is very difficult to be objective regarding topics to which you self-identify. Questioning that which you believed you knew isi deeper - it is questioning that which you believed you knew about yourself.

Who am I?

_________________
be immersed

thequietcenter is one of the few people who posted their own games in the "Game Analysis" sub-forum for the last year. He really doesn't deserve to be dumped on in the way this topic is unfolding. This reminds me very much of the "necrosis" that a more entitled member saw on this forum because there really are more than a handful of people who come by and they are of course mindful of how they would be received, or already came by and were left thinking "what is this place!?".

Who is "dumping on" thequietcenter? The recent comments are related to the difficulties in accepting criticism, which I find to be an interesting topic in and of itself.

I am perfectly happy for thequietcenter to share his ideas for discussion. I believe others are as well. That doesn't mean all of his ideas are automatically going to be accepted as correct, but that is the same for everyone here.

_________________
be immersed

I suppose it is also more difficult to accept criticism if you THINK it is direct at yourself.



I'd describe what you said just now as friendly. In general it is not when someone's simple description of their own experience is met with denial and suggestions that it is something a "snowflake" would think.

First of all: welcome here and anywhere, to discuss Go and to discuss discussing Go

I have little to comment on the position posted, since that's not the main point of the reddit discussion and the meta discussion here and there.

On the point of using AI to improve, I'm on the positive side. I quote the great and dearly missed Bill Spight: "Study what you like". If playing games and reviewing them with KataGo is what makes you play and study, by all means, let the community not discourage you because "that's not the way". BUT, essentially they are right, it could be delusional: progress from 10k to 7k is probably granted via any kind of study, as long as you play games and think about it. It probably doesn't come from the particular things you think you learn, especially if that learning is based on what is known - by experienced players - as a wrong way to use AI and probably also based on a wrong understanding of how AI works. I'm not claiming I have that understanding, but indeed tiny differences in KataGo's evaluation of moves, after few (hundreds) of playouts, are irrelevant. It suffices to play that "best move" and then inspect the winrate again, to see that there's most of the time already an error (imprecision) which exceeds those differences on the previous move. That's why I focus on differences of another order of magnitude. And even that approach gets criticism, because those mistakes might not be systematic. I try solving that by looking for patterns in those big mistakes and work on those.

On a meta level, wherever you go on the Internet on whichever topic, you are bound to encounter healthy debate, good people in a bad mood, vanity disguised as advice, powerhouses that feed off your alleged ignorance and outright trolls. I'm not even sure where the above post would land but I wish you all the best in acknowledging the first category, dismissing the last and being somewhat forgiving for those in between.

Yes of course thequietcenter is welcome to share what he learned and his experiences, and other people too, regardless of their level.

Yes, I'm sorry if I also come across that way, it's unwise towards someone whose personality one doesn't yet know is okay with that type of critique. A good teacher knows the student they are teaching. But not everyone was so harsh. You focus and respond to the people who responded in a way you prefer, and in that way you encourage the wanted response. I wouldn't want thequietcenter getting harsh criticism if it doesn't suit their personality, much less I wouldn't be at ease around too many creepy crawlies, but at the very least thequeitcenter should have responded more to the more gentler commenters and then would respond back and it would be a virtuous cycle.

I'm kind of against censorship for this reason; a lot of 'hate' would fail to survive if there were simply enough people conversationally countering it enough times, but baning and censorship is a sorry way to hide the fact that as a society we fail to do this, while giving a fake virtous image that because you censor a lot, it means you care about hurt feeling

I think you shouldn't be disheartened by this bad spot, and if you like using bots, continue to do so, but take it even more seriously than befort! Commit to becoming an expert in using bots to analyse even as a weak kyu player. That would be an epic way to respond when the same people who critised so harshly see you a a famous go youtuber who specialises at anyalysing bots even as a weak kyu player, thanks to their harshly-given advice--this is the reverse-snowflake way to fightback! Let me know when you reach 10,000 subs in about six months from now, seriously try it.

"They said that I should stop using bots. That I was too weak. Well now I've mastered the bots better than them. Thequietcenter bot analysis channel"

Then it sounds like you had the best of intentions. The crowd can still be hostile even if every person had the best of intentions. Maybe your idea of a "virtuous cycle" is valid but the best response is often to wait for the other person. It is prudent to wait for what that person wishes to say, otherwise it will be more like a vicious cycle which keep adding other peoples opinions but never comes back to that original person (or the original topic or however you wish to put it).

To some degree, that might simply be John's rhetoric. He also likes Mickey Mouse. In this case, I didn't get the sense that anyone was attacking thequietcenter or being hostile, though, I have been offended by certain rhetoric in the past.

I agree with the idea that thequietcenter can speak up if there is something offending him. Otherwise, we are just speculating about what he may or may not find offensive.

_________________
be immersed