Well, I think it’s hilarious that your first reaction is to argue against me, when it turns out my position is now the same as OGS’s (which I didn’t know until benjito educated me).
What you call “hijack” I would call “relevant comment that adding too many warnings to things, such as this komi example, can lead to devaluing the power of the warning as they become normalised, as could happen with a warning on handicap games as suggested”.
So I wouldn’t put a warning triangle on handicap: yes. Unless it’s more intelligent like only appearing if the challenger has a very low fraction of hanidcap games so it is likely to be of use to them.
I think part of the problems people have with handicap is historically handicap has been off by default on OGS (another one of my beefs!) there is a generation of people raised on OGS who don’t like handicap. Handicap is now on by default in various places (yay! that improvement I am aware of) so that culture of handicap dislike should shift, but it will take years, and the people who already don’t like it may be a lost cause.
Currently a ton of scrolling is required to even see there is handicap. Of course you can click into the modal, but by that time the challenge is already taken by someone else.
Change #2: Allow filtering on Handicap/non-Handicap games
Pretty straightforward, I bet cancellers would use it. Significant mental overhead removed from selecting challenges.
Given that the current incentive without being able to temporarily claim/reserve an open challenge while you look more closely at the challenge is to accept as quickly as possible before someone else does. Your suggestion would just punish players who respond to that incentive, rather than correcting the incentive like my claim/reserve suggestion would
If implemented, the visibility could also be in the form of some sort of symbol other than a warning triangle, placed next to the “Handicap : Auto” column for better visibility when accepting challenges quickly.
(as well as in the game infos popup if it seems a good idea)
Or something a bit more visible like using symbols in the options in the column, displaying as
"Handicap : None
or
Handicap : Auto (or specific number)
Options for filtering out/in handicap games seems it would be very efficient, too.
It’s bad design to let people rush and retract at will like now.
It’s like the exception (sorry, made a mistake) becomes the rule (take whatever, cancel after)
So a claim process (so you have some time to check in what consists the challenge) and a delay before selecting another challenge after having canceled (so you’ll be a bit more cautious when selecting)
Displaying the calculated number of stones next to “Auto” seems a good idea, it’s both useful information, and makes the character count different to 4 for “None” so at a glance is clear it’s different:
It is negative reinforcement brought on by following the incentives. However you want to spin it, it is not a solution to the problem like a claim/reserve system would be
In the claim/reserve system I describe, the incentive is to claim as soon as you’re pretty sure you want the challenge, then verify that you want it, and then either accept or cancel. Adding your “improvement” would punish players for following that incentive, thus undermining the entire point of the system: to minimize wasted time by quick acceptances without punishing players for following incentives
I don’t think so: there’s already a separate row for komi, so would be weird to duplicate, and that’s getting a bit long. 6 stones is very different to even game so it’s worth highlighting, but 6 stones 0.5 komi is not much different to 6 stones 2.5 komi.
