Re: computer-go: Engineering (was: Most simple Go rules)

[Don Dailey <drd@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

   From: "Mark Boon" <tesuji@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>

   In any ruleset there must be an arbiter who gives the final score. It's
   necessary since one player might miscount (something a computer wouldn't
   do?). I think the arbiter giving the score is very natural. How do you get
   the score using Tromp/Taylor rules when playing online?

I don't have any problem  with your protocol,  because it has the nice
feature that it's optional.  I think your protocol actually works well
for Tromp/Taylor.  But that's  because I believe you  are exaggerating
the convience of Japanese scoring.

   No matter what you guys argue, I'm absolutely convinced that if people have
   the option of playing to the bitter end, or they get the (same) result
   several dozen meaningless moves before that, a vast majority of people is
   going to opt for ending the game early. I'm trying to give both options: if
   there's a potentially problematic situation you can always play it out. For
   the other 95% of the cases it should be possible to finish earlier.

This is the strength of your end game arbitration protocol.


Don