Best Go servers?

Solomon · **#21**

Temp wrote:

Solomon wrote:

Temp wrote:

I'm around 3kyu KGS, what should I register for on Tygem? Are all the servers equal in rankings? My strength seems to fluctuate a lot. I was beating 3-4 Kyus pretty easy, but then 1 kyu would destroy me easy, Didn't make sense to me. I also seem to mess up a lot in the beginning with joseki and a lot of times I'm playing from behind due to screwing up the first corner. But they say don't study Joseki. I do go to Josekipedia to see the mistake I made, but I'm not sure it's sticking since I don't study it. Not even sure how to study it without attempting to memorize it.

I would try 1d on Tygem. All servers are not equal in rankings, but Tygem seems to be around 2-3 stones inflated than KGS.

You said that there were pros on Tygem. Are the people with (P) after their name and 9dan pros? Or is that just a stone stronger than 9 dan because of the rank difference?

Anyone with a (P) and 9d is a verified pro. The verification allows them to play immediately at 9d, rather than starting at 5d which is the highest rank allowed for a fresh account. However, some pros do play on accounts without doing this as well (e.g., "tmch" is a pro).

Calvin Clark · **#22**

Uberdude wrote:

OGS is not such a haven of bliss anymore (if it ever was), as they also have some abrasive and argumentative admins now. I wonder if that's a universal feature of internet communities, once they get to a certain size you end up with trigger-happy admins on power trips. There's probably sociology papers about it.

Sure. See, for example this paper.

I doubt it's the best, but I'm sure further searching will prove your point.

Quote:

There is a widely accepted point of view that because virtual space is not hierarchical
[3], it is inherently democratic and politically unbiased, and therefore members of virtual
organisations can exercise freedom unavailable in the real world, stratified and burdened
with traditional power and authority structures [29]. According to this view, the Internet
application becomes political only when politicians and large businesses use it for political
games and imposition of power.
In fact, the processes for establishing power relations are imbedded in the communitybuilding
process itself. This paper reports research which suggests that this holds true even
in the cyber communities established for “fun” with no economic incentives, competition,
or explicit political purpose. While there is a considerable degree of negotiation and renegotiation
of one’s status, all attributes of stratification, hierarchy, and power practice can
be observed in virtual organisations. There is a hierarchy of members in different roles
or positions, with access to resources and decision making (novice and expert, respected
authority, ordinary member, moderator, manager, owner of the discussion thread, informal
leader, dissident) [10]

Bantari · **#23**

Marcel Grünauer wrote:

KGS' heavy-handed admins are legendary;

You must be very young or new to all this.
No offense, but it just struck me like the right thing to say here.

Bantari · **#24**

Uberdude wrote:

OGS is not such a haven of bliss anymore (if it ever was), as they also have some abrasive and argumentative admins now. I wonder if that's a universal feature of internet communities, once they get to a certain size you end up with trigger-happy admins on power trips. There's probably sociology papers about it.

Agree. This is what I always said - once you have enough crowd and people are assured of anonymity, two things happen: (some) users start really acting up, and (some) admins become heavy-handed. Power-hungry or not, these two aspects are, to me, the just different sides of the same coin.

We have had some of this discussion when Kaya was the thing, but it never grow to the size where my theory would be proven right. KGS did, as did OGS now, apparently.

Bantari · **#25**

Marcel Grünauer wrote:

This says something about the KGS admin cabal.

Its a cartel, not a cabal.
They also tip cows and paint kittens in their free time. Awful crowd.

Bill Spight · **#26**

Uberdude wrote:

OGS is not such a haven of bliss anymore (if it ever was), as they also have some abrasive and argumentative admins now. I wonder if that's a universal feature of internet communities, once they get to a certain size you end up with trigger-happy admins on power trips. There's probably sociology papers about it.

Didn't happen to us at Participate on the Source, back in the '80s.

And our culture was more Wild West than the internet has become. As for size, we had 1500 active members. Not sure what the difference was.

Celebrir · **#27**

Bill Spight wrote:

Uberdude wrote:

OGS is not such a haven of bliss anymore (if it ever was), as they also have some abrasive and argumentative admins now. I wonder if that's a universal feature of internet communities, once they get to a certain size you end up with trigger-happy admins on power trips. There's probably sociology papers about it.

Didn't happen to us at Participate on the Source, back in the '80s.

And our culture was more Wild West than the internet has become. As for size, we had 1500 active members. Not sure what the difference was.

Maybe still the size. According to their login page, OGS has 216,912 members with 778 online at the same time. Sure, some of the 216,912 players should be inactive,but I don't believe that there are 215,412 inactive members

Bill Spight · **#28**

Celebrir wrote:

Bill Spight wrote:

Uberdude wrote:

OGS is not such a haven of bliss anymore (if it ever was), as they also have some abrasive and argumentative admins now. I wonder if that's a universal feature of internet communities, once they get to a certain size you end up with trigger-happy admins on power trips. There's probably sociology papers about it.

Didn't happen to us at Participate on the Source, back in the '80s.

And our culture was more Wild West than the internet has become. As for size, we had 1500 active members. Not sure what the difference was.

Maybe still the size. According to their login page, OGS has 216,912 members with 778 online at the same time. Sure, some of the 216,912 players should be inactive,but I don't believe that there are 215,412 inactive members

How many administrators do they have? 100?

Javaness2 · **#29**

Many members have multiple accounts, and many former members ... well it is the same story on every Go server.
https://online-go.com/docs/team shows the team. I'm not sure why Jonathan Markovitz has this unique lecturer role.

As for the best Go server, just try them one by one and see which one you like. It is the only way to be sure.

wineandgolover · **#30**

Bantari wrote:

Marcel Grünauer wrote:

KGS' heavy-handed admins are legendary;

You must be very young or new to all this.
No offense, but it just struck me like the right thing to say here.

Was Bantari a Tweety victim? Does he remember NNGS and its band of happy anarchists?

oren · **#31**

Celebrir wrote:

Maybe still the size. According to their login page, OGS has 216,912 members with 778 online at the same time. Sure, some of the 216,912 players should be inactive,but I don't believe that there are 215,412 inactive members

Most are playing turn based games or leaving the web page on while waiting to play. For chat, the biggest room tends to get to about 50 people.

Darsey · **#32**

I rather IGS than others servers. I use OGS to play correspondece games, rarely I play in live in OGS with foreign.

Best Go servers?

Who is online