Life In 19x19

thequietcenter wrote: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.

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.

kvasir wrote: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!?".

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"

Elom0 wrote: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.

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).

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

Kirby wrote:I am perfectly happy for thequietcenter to share his ideas for discussion. I believe others are as well.[...]

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.

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.

The thing is I'll still invade at 3-3 on the left ot attach under at the 3-4 on the right. As long as it's within the AI range of moves it doesn't consider stupid, I always decide it based on style over substance when it comes to the opening, haha I'm more into changing my thinking so I end up agreeing with AI in the opening rather than following AI-chan so move for move.