Question about the proposed feature: Would players who utilise this feature be able to request undo themselves?
In other words, are you allowed to automatically reject all opposing undo requests but sometimes request undo yourself?
It becomes a question of implementation I guess, the difference being between automatically rejecting all incoming undo requests, and disabling the undo requests for both parties during a game. On lichess the latter variant is in effect, and it works really well, just taking this element out of ranked (as well as non-ranked if one is so inclined) games altogether.
1 Like
I dont see why not, i have nothing against this feature. If my opponent doesnt want me to take back my move, i dont care if heâs actively or passively ignoring my request, as it doesnât make any kinda difference on the actual game at all.
OGS already has more features than all the rest go servers put together, i dont see what harm would it do to have one more ^^
ps. i just wanna say this to everyone: if you ever misclick or make any other mistake which you want to take back, it is quite polite to tell in the chat what move you were attempting to play. Itâs only fair for your opponent to know whats going to happen if they accept your request, if you are asking someone to choose something, you should also tell them the options they have.
3 Likes
The only reason I see against having that option is:
which isnât a big issue since now we have a sort of starship control panel. Nobody will notice the difference. 
I like to grant undo by hand, so I donât really need the âalways grant undoâ option. But since someone asked for it: why not?
4 Likes
Hooray, that makes 6 of us, close to half the thread! The revolution starts here! etc.
PS. I take for granted Lys got âalwaysâ and âneverâ mixed up, seeing as how an âalways grant undoâ option hasnât been discussed in earnestâ canât see why anyone would hand that kind of agency to their opponent but hey if anyone seriously wants to automatically grant takebacks hehe be my guest.
Cheers
1 Like
you think OGS is a democratic place? 
3 Likes
Really?
1 Like
With special emphasis on the words discussed in earnest (i.e., not mentioned in passing) yes, furthermore Iâd direct you to the name of this thread and the fact that the user whom you answered (_KoBa) was indeed writing about an option to never allow takebacksâ but hey, sure, options for never allowing and always allowing is fine by me 
Current discussion is mainly about option number one though, feel free to start a separate thread about an âalways-allow-undo-requestsâ option if you feel strongly about it.
Cheers!
Hmm darn I donât know⌠Letâs have a poll!
PS. I did happen to kinda call for a revolution, come to think of it⌠Answer your question? 
I donât know. where i came from, when one calls for a revolution, it typically does not end well.
This is the internet, nothing bad ever happens here (except undo requests).
1 Like
I just donât see it as all that much different from hovering shadow stone around the place to see how it looks on the board. Or if you enable confirm move, you can place a stone, see what you think and then change your mind. Same as undoing if you ask me. The only difference is that I canât tell what they are doing whereas the undo thing needs my intervention (and runs down my clock I think). Therefore if any undo request is granted automatically itâs just the same as enabling âconfirm moveâ for my opponent.
However, I recognise that this is not the discussion you want to have.
My thoughts on having an âalways ignoreâ setting is that the negative aspects you mentioned in the first post are still there is just maybe that you donât feel then. But I suspect your opponent still will.
And finally, I think that undoing is equivalent to dropping a stone IRL. Iâve no idea what the formal rules are but it would be inconceivable for me to insist on my opponent playing it where it landed. We are not playing golf!
Having said that, if itâs thought best for it to be an option then Iâm not really bothered. Like @Gia said I accept and donât request so it wouldnât really affect me. I do think that it should have one of those warning triangle things. And certainly anyone who sets this setting should not be able to request undos.
[Edit: sorry I took so long to write this that various other posts intervened]
1 Like
Earnest.
I didnât know that word. I superficially thought it was something like âearlierâ. My fault.
Thanks for pointing that out and clarifying what you think about other peopleâs thoughts.
The only âearnestâ topic is the one you care about. Nice.
Good luck with your request.
I donât see many undo requests anyhow so I donât think itâs worthwhile.
5 Likes
The thing that irritates me is that the only time I see them is in tournies (which I play rarely, I admit)
2 Likes
Just because I used a word you didnât understand thereâs no need for you to go all blue on me is there?
Your post unfortunately says a lot more about yourself than it does about me. Iâve never said anything close to what you try to make the case. This, however, is a topic about having an option never allowing undo requests, therefore, itâs considered thread hijacking to steer the discussion off 180 degrees. Discussing contradictory things in the same thread makes everything confusing, and thatâs why you should be on topic. Furthermore, said idea was as a matter of fact never âdiscussed in earnestâ (as in, several people weighing in with substantive arguments as to proâs and conâs of having an always allow option), it was mentioned in passing, by some more as a kind of tongue in cheek counterweight to the stated (see title) central theme of this thread.
Just make your own thread, I specifically said you should if you feel strongly about the issue of automatic undo grants. Have a blast, Iâve never stated I think it couldnât lead to an earnest discussion. Since you havenât however I reckon you donât really find the issue important at all, and youâre just being rude because we happen not to agree with one another. People are different, attacking me because I donât think the same as you wonât really get you anywhere. If you had read my earlier posts, you might have come across sections such as
âwe are all differently attuned to these kinds of things. The matter is not one of right or wrong, the matter is one of difference.â
âThis topic wasnât really created in order to have us all state our individual views on undo requests, it was a very concrete inquiry as to why this is not an option.â
and
Thank you all for your input
Which, if youâd care to try and understand me instead of deciding a priori Iâm a meanie for wanting an option you donât personally find useful, would have you understand I very much value the thoughts and input of other people, especially those that differ from your own, as long as you can have a productive dialogue and grow richer from those very differences. The tendency on the internet is, regrettably, not one of dialogue but simply blindly going at people who are different from yourself and/or whatever enclave youâre entrenched in.
Misunderstanding (perhaps not even making an effort to understand) another personâs viewpoint, and then jumping to the hasty and incorrect conclusion that they âdonât care about otherâs thoughtsâ, tells a lot more about the accuser than it does the accused, and it does come across as rather arrogant.
I forgive you though, no hard feelings from my end
Enjoy your weekend, cheers!
edit: spelling and grammar
1 Like
If youâd actually read the earlier posts youâd see there are people whoâs opinions differ from your own and weâve kind of already worked beyond the âI, due to personal taste, wouldnât find this addition usefulâ argument. Personally, I donât find the âgame preferencesâ menu at all overloaded but⌠Maybe we have to agree to disagree about that?
edit: Misread link
1 Like
The link is not to the poll but the meme about option overload.
The question is, if an option were added for this would we be solving a problem that doesnât really exist and effectively only adding to option overload?
One view is that options are already overloaded so one more doesnât matter. Another is that each option should only be added if itâs really adding value for enough people.
So then we are on to what value is this adding? For @Knyttet the value seems significant. Are there enough who agree to justify everybody getting an extra option added to the existing abundance.
Maybe one might think of a âone in one out policyâ. What option could be replaced by this one? This might be av good way of determining what the least useful existing option is. If this one is more useful than that one then it could take itâs place and avoid overload that way.
1 Like
For me (and I think others present in the discussion as well) it comes down to the act of asking for an undo. I donât share your views on the âdropping stonesâ analogyâ in that case the opponent obviously, before your eyes, drops a stone possibly knocking others over in the process, while online stones are always placed with no hint as to the manner of their being placed. A much closer analogy would be your opponent placing a stone, a few second later asking you to please let them place it somewhere else because they meant actually to play somewhere else; neither do I find the âmove-shadowâ or the act of changing your move before you confirm the same as asking for an undo, mainly because⌠Youâre not asking your opponent to take a played move back and pick another one, youâre in the process of choosing a move. I have no issues with people using the analysis board in correspondence go/chess, in fact Iâd reckon itâs the established norm that analysing positions in depth with the analysis board is completely fine. None of this ruptures the game in the same way as breaking the flow of stones by asking your opponent to have to decide whether you can pick another move or not.
As stated earlier, itâs an option thatâs been very welcome over on lichess. Canât find much action in the forums there about removing this option, itâs just a matter of fact that in games where takebacks are disabled you have to stand by your moves and that is that, there will be no onus on any player to have to adjudicate outside-of-rules situations such as takebacks.
Iâm glad to hear you in the end have nothing against the proposal though
Have a nice weekend, cheers!
1 Like
I canât say I find the current âgame preferencesâ menu overloaded at all to be honest, and an option in there to tick or un-tick an âEnable undo-requestsâ option wouldnât turn the thing into a spaceship console as far as Iâm concerned, but youâre certainly free to think otherwise.
As I wrote earlier, I created the topic mostly to see what the reasoning (if there is any) behind this not being an option is, seeing as how well and seamlessly itâs a part of lichess functionality. Iâve never considered the OGS options crammed, but if users find it a labyrinthine mess then I suppose thatâs an argument against adding further functions.
Posting a picture of roughly half of lichess âGame behaviourâ section in user preferences, showing how theyâve solved the issue under discussion.
Cheers!
edit: grammar
1 Like