Why is KGS unique in escaper system? I am not about to complain about the system(altough I find it silly), I am just curious why did you choose to have this system instead of the normal system all go servers have(tygem, wbaduk, IGS as far as I know). Sorry if this question was asked before.

_________________

I also would like to know this. How many of unfinished games are not finished due to reason that the losing party left the game out of spite.

It's very simple. To me a few unfinished games (and I have them too, I have met escapers) aren't that big a deal. You know you won. The guy who ran away knows you won. The server doesn't know, but so what? The rank system can handle a few escapes.

Meanwhile, getting a loss because your internet connected flaked out for a few minutes is a big deal.

People who escape a lot (and most escapers do it a lot, not once or twice) *ARE* given losses for their escapes. So there are really very few escapers who the server doesn't catch.

Damn. I was so prepared to have a heated debate over better escaper handling, but wms's mature attitude over this whole thing made me reconsider my own attitude. Perhaps it's just that "turd happens" in life sometimes and no system would prevent players from escaping if they really want to, nor would any such system prevent players from experiencing resentment.

While the current escaper system doesn't bug me for the most part, would it be possible for one to be notified when leaving a game from which a player has already escaped? I always feel unsure about leaving, just in case I am the one to be marked as an escaper.

If you get the popup about your opponent leaving, then it's safe for you to go. If you haven't gotten that, they they should still be in the user list for the game, and you will be marked as the escaper.

But a few escapes from you won't do you harm. You can finish the game later. It's only once you get a bunch (don't recall the exact limit now) that your escapes turn into losses.

If I recall even the current system is a bit of a compromise from what KGS's old escaper system, where players were deranked after a certain percentage of their game (10%? I'm not sure, it's been a while). The logic was still the same though, start with the assumption that most players are acting in good faith, assume it is better to have a game left unfinished than incorrectly scored as a loss, have a mechanism that prevents chronic abusers from affecting the ranking system.

Realistically, even under the old "softer" system if a person (who continuously plays a significant number of games) could avoid 10% of their losses they could turn an expected 45% winning percentage into 50% (as far as maintaining rank goes), or a 33% into a 36% (if they are headed toward being demoted). Amusingly enough, the person who would potentially benefit the most would be someone who already has an above average chance of winning (on the verge of being promoted) because they could turn, a 67% winning percentage into a 74%...but of course as soon as they receive their potentially dubious promotion, that advantage is lost.

If the biggest worry you have is that your opponent might accidentally be labeled as half a rank stronger than they are, I guess things are going pretty well (=

What wms is saying, sounds very sensible, but, I, for my part, can also understand people who get some satisfaction from seeing a black medal next to a won game (and I understand that a medal weeks after the win is not really the same). This satisfaction may be irrational, but it is real and, I think, shared by many. Also, I think the KGS escaper system can be especially annoying for those who play rarely or irregularly. For example, if you are trying to get back a fixed rating and finally found somebody to play with (or if you finally pulled yourself together to play a game in order to keep your fixed rating from getting a question mark) and have spent an hour and a half on securing a victory, I think it is only natural to be annoyed, if the opponent disappears during counting.



If I played from a bad internet connection, I would be more worried about annoying my opponent by constantly disappearing, than with losing a game because of my connection. And I would be happy to give a win away as a compensation for wasting his time. Of course an opponent might not want an undeserved win and prefer to finish the game. This is a bigger deal. However, I think an "accept win" button would be superfluous to most people.



I would have thought that many escapers might change their account a lot so that the accounts never get old enough to be caught by the system. But what do I know.

Anyway, personally, I don't find that the escaper system is a big deal because, at least at my level, escapers are rather rare on KGS. It may well be true that most escapers are caught in the KGS system and, even if it is not the case, you cannot please everybody. At least those with a bad internet connection profit. I am not sure the KGS system is what the majority of the users would prefer, but then again democracy is not always the proper solution.

Is it still considered a loss if you return, attempt to continue the game, and your former opponent refuses to accept?

I also wonder if the number of people who get irritated and upset ("not having fun") because of escapers isn't substantially larger than the number of people who experience frequent disconnects from which they don't recover within five minutes. Here in Germany we usually have our DSL connections reset once every 24h, but it reconnects within seconds. Except for power outages and hardware failure, I don't remember a case where I was offline for more than five minutes in the past twenty or so years (but I did have ISDN fairly early, since about '93 or '94, which was more stable than dial-up) .

I don't have a problem with the current escaper policy, though it seems to be a very recurring issue in EGR and the beginner's room (where people accidentally resign when they leave, or wait for half an hour, being afraid of closing the window) -- and it strikes me a little "less clean" than the way Tygem/etc. handle it.

From a strictly logical point of view the current policy really is fine, but as Aeneas pointed out it doesn't satisfy a visceral need to crush your opponent under foot and salt his fields and hear the lamentations of his women...

Any sort of popup validation from the server that you're going to get it counted as a won game eventually would go a long way. As sevis points out, when you get tired of waiting and decide to start a new game, the server always accuses you of being the one to leave first. It'd be nice if that message was different if your opponent has already left ("that jerk! Feel free to leave this game and start another; the system will count this as a win for you if that jerk leaves more games") Then it at least feels like someone is validating your win.

As it is it's so anticlimactic that it's frustrating.

_________________
1k KGS

But if he or she stuck around, he could potentially save a lost game, like with a Ko-nan fight... (Again, off-topic and not serious, but couldn't resist)

_________________
Someday I want to be strong enough to earn KGS[-].

I think connection problems are less of an issue with today's technology.

I would prefer a request system where you could request to postpone the game. The opponent should consent to it, kind of similar to how the opponent can consent to adding more time.

_________________
be immersed

You are at least 6 dan in puns.

Disclaimer: I have been away from KGS for six months, so some of the details I talk about may have changed by now, my apologies if that is the case!

While I appreciate the mature attitude and more relaxed way of handling this (after all that is a big part of what sets KGS apart), I also do feel that the current system promotes aggravation too much. Aggravation leads to stress, and that leads to heated tempers.

Details could go a long way to mitigate this, without changing the underlying philosophy. For example, the already mentioned popup dialog should be changed to a more reassuring message. I still remember the angst I felt the first few times, when I tried to close a game my opponent escaped from and the warning dialog popped up. Was I really allowed to just close the window? Or would I have to wait for some kind of timeout, like on most other servers? Would I be labeled an escaper myself, if I just close the game? Or would it be counted as my "consent" to adjourn the game? Not a big deal once you know exactly how it works, but details like these do matter, and it is easy to lose sight of how they are perceived by a newer player.

Most of the time when your opponent escapes, we know that it most likely wasn't a fluke, because of the timing when it happens. So there is no point in waiting around, wasting our time even more, and the current wording makes it sound like we do something wrong if we don't wait for the other player to return.

Conversely, while I understand the issue of disconnections, what is the purpose of allowing players to just close the window and start another game? That is just absurd, and no amount of zen philosophy suffices to justify that. There are two things wrong with that:

1) Closing the window is handled the same way as a disconnect. Why? Of course you can always just plug the chord to have the same result, but the barrier for that is a lot higher than just pressing the "exit" button. Wilfully closing/adjourning the game should simply never be possible, unless the opponent agrees to it. This is rude and unnecessary. Rudeness creates aggravation, so why allow it?

2) I also perfectly understand that you can start a new game after you disconnected, as your opponent may have left or started another game. But what is the reasonable explanation for allowing an escaper to start a new game, when his previous opponent is still waiting on the board for his return? This is one of the rudest things to do, and from what I can tell, it is also absolutely unnecessary to allow it. I can't think of a single legit use case where this behaviour is helpful or just. Frankly, I think that if you join the server and a game you escaped from is active with the other player still waiting, you should be forced right back into the game. No other options necessary.

None of these things fundamentally make a difference, as the same rudeness can be expressed in more devious ways (and thus I understand if it has not seemed a priority to do something about it), but I hope I was able to make my point that it leads to unnecessary aggravation if such rudeness is explicitly allowed by the mechanics.

Changing these details would be possible without changing the system itself and the underlying philosophy, and I believe that it would help create a calmer, more relaxed atmosphere.

Other than that, the only major improvement I would wish for would be the possibility to request a manual adjudication of a game, to immediately score adjourned games if the outcome is already obvious.

Of course this is a question of manpower (unless it is volunteer based as on the free chess server FICS), but if it would at all be possible to provide this service for a fee (e.g. for subscribers), I would gladly sign up for it.

Thanks for listening!

Good idea! But then your opponent might refuse to postpone and you'd be forced to escape anyway.

Although I find escapers annoying (after spending a lot of concentration on the game), I don't think my KGS rank is that important. If I played a good game or a good move and my opponent escapes then I can still learn from it and get stronger in the long term.

Besides, my rank (9k) is probably more like 8k-11k depending on my mood and level of concentration. So I tend not to put too much importance on my rank. Maybe I will if/when I become Dan rated.

The opponent should not be obligated to postpone (because you two agreed to the game settings), so if you request to resume later and they deny it, you should continue to play the game you agreed to. If you've committed to some time setting, play it through to the end.

On the topic of weak internet connections, having a small time limit for players to return in the event that their connection dies still eliminates the escaper problem.

_________________
be immersed

but if someone knocks on the door?!
(this happened to me a couple of times, i HATE it!)

stranger: hello sir, would you be interested in... *insert product here*
me: NO! *SLAMS DOOR*
..aaand back to the game

Same as in a go tournament: your clock keeps running. You can answer the door if you'd like. You can ignore it, if you'd like, too.

Though, admittedly, I don't see that many door-do-door salesmen at go tournaments.

_________________
be immersed

And what if I want to pause the game, so I can analyse it without running out of time? This reasoning doesn't really work. If you explain the situation, your opponent may believe you and agree to add time or adjourn / pause the game. It would also be nice if running down the clock would not automatically win the game, but only if the opponent claims the win (perhaps giving the option to add extra time instead, or to pause the game).

I would like the system to be one that promotes lenience, but does not allow abuse.

I had someone escape on a free game last night.

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