Make "analysis disabled" the default (poll) - COMING SOON!

[awaytoplay]

@Eugene

why do you care if a person is using a bot to help them, then? That too is reflected in their rank…

unless they only use it every other game to stay on a specific rank for whatever reason.

@Kaworu_Nagisa

Bots are vastly different from analysis mode.

both are external tools that improve the skill level. the only difference is efficiency.

[DVbS78rkR7NVe]

Haha.
www.reddit.com/r/baduk/comments/exc8if/
I think @_KoBa almost killed the discussion here with his reasonableness.

Fitting quote:

@Professor_X

If I was a cute Chinese baby using analysis, then shame the hell out of me. Otherwise, put a sock in it. I started playing at the age of 34.

[Eugene]

@awaytoplay

unless they only use it every other game to stay on a specific rank for whatever reason.

This applies to analysis, as well…

[Eugene]

@Kaworu_Nagisa

The score estimator is bot assistance, plain and simple.

Yeah - this will become more obvious when a better one becomes available thanks precisely to bot analysis. I’m hoping it will be turned off at that point

[Kaworu_Nagisa]

@awaytoplay

both are external tools that improve the skill level. the only difference is efficiency.

Analysis mode is internal to OGS. OGS made the choice to implement it.

Bots automatically do all of the analysis, reading and judging for you. Analysis mode does not.

[Kosh]

Analysis mode actually gives you the opportunity to put MORE thought into your move by helping to organise YOUR thoughts. It is simply a different way to play consistent with correspondence tradition.

[awaytoplay]

@Kaworu_Nagisa

Analysis mode is internal to OGS.

OGS by itself is an external tool. a game is played in the minds of 2 players, the board is only an external tool to communicate moves.

[orbitaleccentric]

At my kitchen table where my tablet resides in the evening, I have a mini swiss army knife on the table too.

In games where analysis is disabled I will sometimes withdraw the plastic toothpick from the knife and use it on the screen pointing to stone positions to help me read through.

Sometimes if I’m desperate, I will get a piece of paper, draw a grid, draw the stone positions and work through possible positions…

[yebellz]

@_KoBa

Should i make a new topic or github request of this?

This idea is great and has been brought up many times in the past.

Besides the option of enabling analysis, I think the ability to customize time settings is also a big game changer. For everyone that cares about inclusiveness, enabling groups to set up both slower and faster ladders would really help more people participate in ladders.

I’m surprised that there does not seem to already be an open GitHub issue requesting this feature, so I went ahead and opened a GitHub issue:

Custom Settings for Group Ladders

And made another topic to discuss it here:

Allow Custom Settings for Group Ladders

Feature request: allow groups to customize the settings/rules of their ladders. Various settings that could be customized: Time settings Game play rules (e.g., Japanese, Chinese, AGA, New Zealand, etc.) Whether analysis is enabled Number of active challenges Handicap settings? This proposal has been brought up in several discussions in the past: Poll: [REDO] Pick your favorite time control settings for all future correspondence ladder games Ladder time limits Make new rules for ladders Ladder…

[RubyMineshaft]

I think Kaworu_Nagisa summed it up perfectly with:

@Kaworu_Nagisa

Bots are vastly different from analysis mode. One requires you to put effort in and the only advantage it gives is that you can read deeper (apparently it has also caused some games to be lost by its use as the coutndown timer doesn’t notify the player). The other does literally everything for you and requires zero effort.

I’m fine with analysis, since it’s a tool provided by OGS and both players have access to it. While both players technically could have access to a bot as well, they are against the rules and ethical players will not use them during a game.

I initially voted to keep analysis enabled, but I guess my true response should be that I don’t care about the default, since it really makes no difference to me.

Edit: I have modified my vote to reflect this.

[shinuito]

I vote we do away with ogs so and just keep the chat part and the forums. Everything else is assistance (cheating).

But a real question though, if analysis is disabled can you still do malkovich mode in correspondence. The idea of sharing variations in malkovich (although I’ve only done it maybe less than 5 times?) is kind of cool. Even if it’s just for yourself to try remember what you were thinking at the time.

If disabled by default, if you are setting up the game you could just reenable analysis for it. Just wondering if other people use that feature much?

[Kosh]

Short answer is ‘no’. If analysis is ‘off’ then anything that allows player to look at variations in the game is ‘off’ too. ie. Conditional moves and chat variations.

[yebellz]

When someone says “short answer” that implies there is also a longer answer, which I’m guessing is some sort of loophole in this case? Can spectators still use the analysis tool if analysis is disabled?

[flovo]

@yebellz

Can spectators still use the analysis tool if analysis is disabled?

Yes, they are not part of the game.

[Jikolo]

I totally agree with you. I would like to add that we should also have the right to impose (if not, he can refuse the game of course) to the opponent the deactivation of the analysis when we want to play a game without analysis.

[bugcat]

52% of voting people in Britain’s largest referendum is a “vocal minority” now? I don’t want to get political but don’t be so weasel-worded. Funny how hard Europhiles often seem to have equal measures of delusion and disdain…

[Vsotvep]

@bugcat

52% of voting people

It might be me, but I interpreted the vocal minority not as the voters, but as the politicians. I think about 3/4 of the parliament was in favour of remain. I also perceived the pro-brexit politicians to be bit more vocal about their stance, but that could be bias.

In the end, whatever side of the coin you fall on, it’s…

@orbitaleccentric

Time to move on

[yebellz]

@yebellz

some sort of loophole in this case? Can spectators still use the analysis tool if analysis is disabled?

@flovo

Yes

Then, let me play devil’s advocate while discussing the following.

The loophole above essentially allows players to analyze any public game that they are playing. One only need to logout and view the game page, or access the game page from a different browser/device (or private browsing mode) while not logging in.

Hence, even if analysis is disabled in a game, a player could still easily circumvent that restriction and analyze away. This is especially easily to do for correspondence games, where time is a luxury (making it easy to switch browsers).

So, some questions to prompt discussion (not that I’m advocating for it):
Should players exploit this loophole to use analysis in a game with analysis disabled?
Why or why not? Would it be wrong to do so?

On another note, I think @orbitaleccentric’s ultimate point is about how only a small minority of OGS users are active on these forums, but we’re discussing a decision that would impact everyone. That being said, I do think a pretty diverse range of views have been expressed in this thread, and the poll is leaning toward preserving the status quo. If this discussion did lead to suggesting a change to be made, perhaps we could confirm the decision with a public poll, like a referendum of some sort.

[Kaworu_Nagisa]

You hardly need to do all that, as you can simply open up an sgf editor.

If both players don’t agree to it at the game start, then it’s cheating.

[yebellz]

Right, there are certainly many ways to circumvent it, but I don’t think anything is easier than right-clicking on the game thumbnail and selecting “Open Link in New Private Window” (or whatever the similar option is across various browsers).

@Kaworu_Nagisa

If both players don’t agree to it at the game start, then it’s cheating.

Agree to what exactly? Allowing analysis? Is disallowing this behavior implied by having the “analysis disabled” box checked? Why is it cheating?

These are all questions meant to prompt further discussion. I’m not actually advocating for exploiting this loophole, but just want to explore its ramifications.

Earlier in this thread, people already discussed circumventing disabled analysis via other more tedious methods. I think a fundamental division in this debate is whether doing so should even be considered wrong.

I’m of the view that if analysis is disabled, players should not circumvent that prohibition by any means (except mental visualization, of course).