Life In 19x19

Mef wrote:This is precisely what it does. It marks the player who is refusing to finish the game as the escaper.

But the KGS escaper policy allows people to leave the game without loosing, so it doesn't mark people as an escaper.

speedchase wrote:

Mef wrote:This is precisely what it does. It marks the player who is refusing to finish the game as the escaper.

But the KGS escaper policy allows people to leave the game without loosing, so it doesn't mark people as an escaper.

The KGS escaper system marks the first person to leave any rated, timed, game. If a player has been flagged in >10% of their rated games (minimum of 3, maximum of 10), they begin to forfeit their earliest escaped games. If a player forfeits 10 games in this manner, all games they are the first to leave are immediately forfeited.

If you play frequently, this gives you some leeway for disconnections or games you need to otherwise resume, however it also prevents you abusing the same system to compromise the integrity of the rating system (since with 10% unfinished games, you would be able to raise a 50% winning rate to 55%, still much less than half a stone difference).

Mef wrote:The KGS escaper system marks the first person to leave any rated, timed, game. If a player has been flagged in >10% of their rated games (minimum of 3, maximum of 10), they begin to forfeit their earliest escaped games. If a player forfeits 10 games in this manner, all games they are the first to leave are immediately forfeited.

If you play frequently, this gives you some leeway for disconnections or games you need to otherwise resume, however it also prevents you abusing the same system to compromise the integrity of the rating system (since with 10% unfinished games, you would be able to raise a 50% winning rate to 55%, still much less than half a stone difference).

I understand all of this, and I am saying it is not good enough to be a distinction worth noting.

speedchase wrote:I understand all of this

My apologies then, I was simply trying to make sure it was clear given that both of these statements appeared to have a misunderstanding of how the system operates:

speedchase wrote:so if you leave, or wait for your opponent too, it doesn't make a difference.

speedchase wrote:so it doesn't mark people as an escaper.

It does make a difference, and the system does flag those who leave first, hence why FlameBlade mentioned if you have an opponent attempting to abuse the scoring phase of a game it is suggested you contact an admin.

Mef wrote:
-If after two passes have been made, a player no longer feels there is a gainful play, does not have a dispute over the status of a group, yet still does not wish to register the game as completed, and intends to sit around indefinitely no longer constrained by the time settings of the game that were agreed upon -- this is an abuse.

As such that player will be removed from the game so that they are marked as an escaper (their behavior being seen as equivalent to them leaving the game after passing).

Seems the punishment does not fit the crime. Why declare someone an escaper who refuses to leave? Wouldn't it make more sense just to push the "done" button for them and declare them the loser?

daal wrote:Seems the punishment does not fit the crime. Why declare someone an escaper who refuses to leave? Wouldn't it make more sense just to push the "done" button for them and declare them the loser?

Only players can click on Done.

Refusing to finish a game is equivalent to trying to escape it, only it wastes more time (of everyone involved).

What if the person has some technical difficulty where they are continued to be present on the server but their OS malfunctions in a way to prevent them from grabbing focus of the window?

Just leaving a game you can claim technical difficulty, but apparently the rules get very strict during scoring, even if its not the persons fault.

It is very bad policy if the rules are so open to abuse at one point of the game, then suddenly applied full force at another point.

badukJr wrote:What if the person has some technical difficulty where they are continued to be present on the server but their OS malfunctions in a way to prevent them from grabbing focus of the window?

Just leaving a game you can claim technical difficulty, but apparently the rules get very strict during scoring, even if its not the persons fault.

It is very bad policy if the rules are so open to abuse at one point of the game, then suddenly applied full force at another point.

In the unlikely event that your computer is fully functioning up to the moment you pass, however renders you unable to click the done button during the scoring phase, then you can simply log back in once your computer is functioning, resume the game and resign it. The "full force" of the rules simply means you have to log in to the server again, which if your computer is frozen for 5 minutes where you cannot click a button or chat in KGS it is probably a wise idea to do so anyway.

Nyanjilla wrote:

daal wrote:Seems the punishment does not fit the crime. Why declare someone an escaper who refuses to leave? Wouldn't it make more sense just to push the "done" button for them and declare them the loser?

Only players can click on Done.

Refusing to finish a game is equivalent to trying to escape it, only it wastes more time (of everyone involved).

This doesn't make sense to me. If an admin can declare the game adjourned although the players are both still there, why can't he declare it over? Seems just to be a matter of choice. If the problem is technical, then surely that can't be a huge hurdle. It would waste far less time and cause less dissatisfaction if such games could be forcibly ended - or are you assuming a good reason for not clicking "done?"

daal wrote:This doesn't make sense to me. If an admin can declare the game adjourned although the players are both still there, why can't he declare it over?

Both players are not still there:

Mef wrote:-If after two passes have been made, a player ... does not wish to register the game as completed, and intends to sit around indefinitely...this is an abuse.

As such that player will be removed from the game so that they are marked as an escaper

Mef wrote:

daal wrote:This doesn't make sense to me. If an admin can declare the game adjourned although the players are both still there, why can't he declare it over?

Both players are not still there:

Mef wrote:-If after two passes have been made, a player ... does not wish to register the game as completed, and intends to sit around indefinitely...this is an abuse.

As such that player will be removed from the game so that they are marked as an escaper

I must say, it really sounds like you are talking in circles. At the point that the dispute starts, both players are still there. The question is: what to do about the abuse? You say: The admin removes the offender from the game, thus labeling him an escaper, and I say: instead, you should declare him the loser. What is better about the way things are currently done?

Imagine this situation:

Two players just reached scoring phase. Losing player sees that he has lost the game, but refuses to click "done". Then sits around in the room, doing nothing.

Now, if the winning player clicked done, and asks the losing player to click on "done", and losing player doesn't respond. Imagine this situation, where losing player has appeared to walk away from the screen without exiting the game itself...winning player is left sitting at the screen for 10 minutes, waiting for the other guy to finally click "Done"

With this situation, I ask you what you would do here, if you were the admin? Keep in mind that telling the winning player to leave the game is not the solution here.

If I were the admin, and it were technically feasible, I would declare the game over by pressing the "done" button for the losing player. What's wrong with this idea?

daal wrote:If I were the admin, and it were technically feasible, I would declare the game over by pressing the "done" button for the losing player. What's wrong with this idea?

The only issue I see, is that we still don't know if it is possible because the admins are talking in circles (as you mentioned earlier).

What is the big deal here? KGS rules are dead simple: you can leave ranked games whenever you please, but if you do it too much you start forfeiting them.

Sure, it seems sort of silly that you can leave a game right before it's scored to avoid a loss. But you can leave a game right after your huge group dies and avoid a loss like that; happens all the time. Why not declare him the loser? Maybe because he disconnected or something and he actually wants to undo and play more moves. That's precisely the same reason given why an admin wouldn't declare someone the loser after they lose a huge group; maybe they disconnected and they want to play more moves.

It's no more or less abusive. I don't know why you would be cool with KGS's normal escaper rules but suddenly feel like this particular instance is too lenient. It's completely consistent and it works well enough.