I haven’t looked yet, but it sure sounds like we’re sending “I accept” doesn’t it!
3 Likes
as opposed to “I agree”?
Pff whatever 
Jon_Ko has a great point, which is that if we are not already making sure that the person is agreeing to the thing that we’re about to actually do (as opposed to agreeing to the latest thing we heard about), then we surely can do that, and it would improve the situation.
Maybe we are already attempting that, but the kinds of problems we’re ready about imply that we’re not.
Personally, it’s in “my list to check on”, but that list is already overflowing, so if anyone else wants to take a look that’d be a Good Thing I reckon …
4 Likes
I checked the api, and it appears stones are passed on acceptance:
I didn’t check if the server actually respects this field, but the good news is the interface is already there
4 Likes
Maybe a last confirmation screen, with the configuration elected de facto (the one the server has after first acceptance by both) could avoid problems due to lag/desync? Server wait to have both acceptance then block any modification and send this confirmation screen with the accepted at first position (to reconfirm or to cancel) I don’t see how lag will interfere much like this.
IMHO safety should stay at first.
1: what is your assesment (send)?
2: assesment by both players: do you agree?
The lack of 2 is what make the process unsecure
As I suggested over at Use AI scoring to eliminate score cheating - #32 by PJTraill , I think you should not even see your opponent’s score marking adjustments until you have made your own. There I suggested what I believe the UI should do.
2 Likes