Re: [computer-go] Protocol - C

[drd@xxxxxxx]

Mark,

Yes,  I definitely agree there are advantages and disadvantages to what you 
pass.   Passing the score is sufficient and has the advantage of not 
communicating more information than is needed.     However I would point out 
that HUMANS do not play games when resolving the score.   The idea isn't to 
trick your opponent, merely to come to the proper conclusion.

Regardless, I'm not fussy at all about this point.   I suppose some method 
will be determined for marking the board if the contestants do not.   Or it 
can simply remain unmarked and only the winner be reported.

Don


On Monday 01 August 2005 3:54 am, Mark Boon wrote:
> On 7/29/05, drd@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx <drd@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > I think it's a good variation on the idea.    Dead stone reporting is the
> > simplest way to communicate the status of all points on the board for
> > this purpose, since there are usually very few dead stones.
> >
> > The advantage of this is that a very well behaved program need not worry
> > about dead stones that are not in dispute.
>
> How about contested points?
>
> I think passing the score should suffice, passing the list of dead
> stones gives away more information to my opponent than I'd like to.
> _______________________________________________
> computer-go mailing list
> computer-go@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
_______________________________________________
computer-go mailing list
computer-go@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/