I’ve never run into this problem on another go server.
Oh, come on, use your imagination. There’s tons of ways to fix this problem or improve upon the way it normally works! What is it with the defeatist attitude everyone has here? Nothing can be fixed. Nothing can be improved. Get used to it. Geez.
How about this for one of many hypothetical fixes: you click exit scoring. It asks you to mark the group(s) you are contending the status of. A popup to the LAST person to pass says “your opponent has contended the status of the marked groups. Please play at least one additional move to try to resolve the dispute.” After you dismiss the move, a predetermined set of time (some byo yomi periods, something reasonable) begins. You play and a dialogue box appears for your opponent requesting them to play at least one additional move. This is so they cannot abuse the system by simply requiring that their opponent must play one additional move. It may be necessary to make dame points unplayable or ask that they be filled before this process, but that doesn’t seem too tough. Even if this repeats a couple times, there is always forward progress, clear intent, a communication of the dispute, and the proper player playing first.
Optionally, you could make three failed attempts to resolve the game in this manner simply defer to moderator decision. A moderator ticket is instantly called and they will decide when they can look at it.
And there are other options, all doable, all inarguably better, all more easier for a beginner to understand what is going on and what is fair to do during the scoring phase.
There’s other ways, too.[quote=“temifar, post:4, topic:9316”]
3. If a player requests resumption of a stopped game, his opponent must oblige and has the right to play first.
[/quote]
I like how you emphasized this one part, right before the part that is the bigger problem: the WRONG player is playing first!!! I would think if one had to choose, the spirit of the rule in all three sets is more important than one technical aspect that doesn’t translate well to an online environment in one (imo inferior) ruleset interpretation.