I’m playing a correspondance game with analysis disabled. This forbids me to entering analysis mode, downloading the sgf and anything. But I can fork the game to play with a bot (it’s one of the option to the right). So I can try out ideas with a bot before playing in the game. This feels extremely wrong to me. This should only be possible after a game is finished (independent of whether analysis is en- or disabled). And even better, I can enter analyse mode now and try all fancy stuff. I don’t think that this was the idea of the designer.
I suggest that forking is only possible when analysing a finished game (and now let’s play out what happens from here etc…). There is absolutely no point of having this possibility while the original game is ongoing.
In the meantime, if you ever missed the analysis mode: there you go.
Hmm good point, i’ll add it to the todo list
Disabling forking (or analysis) still doesn’t prevent people from duplicating and analyzing the position on a physical or virtual board. It’s not practically enforceable beyond asking people to follow an honor code.
Analyzing a game while being assisted by a bot and/or other players shouldn’t be done for any games, whether analysis is enabled or not, except for maybe some special games where the circumstances are clearly laid out and agreed to beforehand by both players.
I even don’t mind if people do that (or other things as using a database or joseki dictionaries) as long as people do it consistently so that their rating and the playing strength somehow correlates. I dislike the “analysis disabled”-option anyway. But DDKs shouldn’t be served a 10kyu bot assistance on a silver tablet 3 clicks away (that’s my 3 kyu opinion, I’m not directly affected). If they set this up at home, so be it.
And if the “analysis disabled”-option shall exist with disallowing conditional moves etc then forking should be out of the question. Even with analysis enabled it only leads to behaviour that nobody wants to encourage.
I don’t quite get this logic. You don’t like a player having easy access to bot analysis via this website, but “so be it” if they were to cheat with an external program? I would dislike both situations, since I believe the core act (using AI software to assist play) is the same and should be considered cheating. Unfortunately, there is a no way to prevent a player from cheating in a correspondence game via using external software, beyond expecting players to follow an honor code.
If someone were to cheat by using a bot, I would actually prefer that they did via this site by forking the game and using one of the built-in bots, since that would create very obvious evidence of that cheating which hopefully the moderators could act upon. Thus, it’s not so much a silver platter, but rather a trap.
So ya’ll are having the same debate we had when we first decided to add the option to disable analysis. Nothing we do can truly prevent feeding the game into a third party system and effectively bypassing our little checkbox, but what we can at least remove the easy temptation and discourage it by making it a little harder to do. So we do what we can, and honesty has to carry it from there
As long as I’ve got a sensible opponent who helps me improving my game I don’t care what he throws at me. We don’t play for money after all. And if somebody bites the pain to have some bot help at home I’ve decided for the sake of my inner peace not to mind it.
But I don’t want to encourage players to get the help of 10kyu bots. This won’t help them improve. That’s why I disagree with the forking in ongoing games. Might not be logic, but it is a point of view
It wont be the last time. It’s a sensible debate after all. Occasionaly reminds of the ethics speech in millers crossing (too bad, no youtube).
Well, I hope this doesn’t ruin your inner peace, but it would hardly require any pain for someone to use a bot at home. The bots used on this site (Pachi, Fuego, and GnuGo) are all freely available. Further, there are many more freely and commercially available options out there, some of which are much stronger than the 10 kyu-ish options on this site.
I doubt that this forking feature has any actual impact toward encouraging players to use bots for analysis. Has there ever even been a single case of a player forking an ongoing game for analysis using a bot? Maybe this is a problem that simply doesn’t exist. I doubt that anyone would choose to cheat in a fashion that makes it so obvious to be caught. Ultimately, I don’t think it’s this slight difference of convenience that determines whether players will actually cheat. I think the only effective deterrent is the sense of honor and the desire to actually improve rather than simply cause grief.
I think those two statements capture my feeling exactly. If a player’s rating is an accurate reflection of how difficult of an opponent they will be, it doesn’t really matter if they use a bot (or even if they have an ancient spirit trapped in their mind directing their moves for that matter.) Is it unethical of them? Probably. Does it affect my ability to play and enjoy the game? Not really. As long as they aren’t rude or annoying, the effect on me is minimal.