Re: [computer-go] I know we disagree, but I choose to do nothingabout it.

["William M. Shubert" <wms@xxxxxxxxxx>]

Using the same argument as you, I come to the opposite conclusion.

That is, like you, when I see people talk, they call stones on the board
"dead" and stones taken off the board "captured."

Unlike you, I see no reason to force people to change this terminology.
Why not keep using it? It would cause so much confusion to change, and
it works fine for me. You say it makes no sense, but isn't "dead" the
opposite of "living"? And since we call a group on the board with two
eyes "alive," it makes sense to call the opposite (a group on the board
that cannot achieve two eyes) "dead." And "captured" again makes sense,
once something is captured it is usually removed to another place...in
this case, captured stones are removed from the board.

On Tue, 2005-07-26 at 16:48 -0500, Robin Kramer wrote:
> I know it is standard convention to call stones on the board dead. 
> But there is a distinction between being on the board considered as
> captured and dead.
> 
> I would use the terminology captured versus dead.  If you listen to
> people at Go groups most people refer to stones on the board as dead
> and stones taken off the board as captured.  Which makes no sense to
> me, unless you are playing Chinese, where the dead stones are returned
> to the opponents dish(reincarnation)....
> 
> They are different and it would be nice if people would refer to
> stones on the board as captured, and stones removed from the board as
> dead.
> 
> -Robin


_______________________________________________
computer-go mailing list
computer-go@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/