One of the best ways for the devs to reduce cheating and improve the OGS experience would be to fix this. It would make cheating even more pointless than it already is.
Allow mods to change a game result.
This could potentially be way more complicated with glicko than it would have been with our old system. Especially if the game in question is the last of a batch.
1 Like
I donât see how that can be true because annulling would cause similar complications and yet the mods can already annul games after a game has been scored.
3 Likes
Yeah⌠I donât claim to be an expert on the system haha but in my head there warning bells go off that essentially deleting a game may be a lot easier than trying to edit the record. shrug happy to be proven wrong but itâs never been an ability the mods have had and I suspect they have a good reason for that.
1 Like
I suspect the same but the issue has become the elephant in the room on a couple of threads.
I was wondering if the concern was that it would generate too much work for mods but it could be restricted to those games where a mod has been called before the end. No returns for âchange of mindâ. 
So people would still have to use due diligence in the scoring phase.
1 Like
Iâm not sure whether reports take a snap shot of the game state at the time of lodging or not⌠But I imagine it would be simple enough to code up if they donât
1 Like
Just like the game of Go, thereâs always an added wrinkle. It shouldnât surprise me that elephants have wrinkles! Maybe thatâs why they donât get talked about in rooms.
2 Likes
Itâs just the way OGS works at a deep level, I think. At the end of the game, I would assume that the server closes contact with the SGF file (or opens it, copies the info over, then closes it depending on how things operate) and that that SGF is then stored on a read-only basis. Then when the game is viewed later, the server probably generates the page dynamically from that SGF in the database. So mods would require privileges to change read-only data and to access the database remotely, and theyâd need an interface over which to do it unless theyâre going to manually edit the SGFs in Notepad etc.etc. etc. My speculation (and itâs only speculation) is that there are issues like this.
1 Like
Emulate the court system. Have an appeal mechanism in place whereby the losing party can appeal a decision to a supermoderator or board of appeals. Ultimately going all the way up to the site devs/owners (supreme court) to decide, but can be vetoâd by popular opinion (if enough casual OGS members vote to override etc, aka a checks and balances of power) and ultimately all of that cross referenced and checked by a AI NN trained to count and also to detect cheating etc.
Then implement a âthree strikes and you are outâ rule whereby anyone who lost three appeals in a row will forfeit the right to invoking further appeals etc. But make an exception clause for that on a case by case basis that is of a discretionary review nature etc. Moderator decisions can be made entirely public and perhaps moderators who have power to judge/overturn the decision on games can even be voted into power by the community itself as a form of government of the people and by the people and for the people. I can think maybe the ability of have appeals decided by a âjuryâ panel, random members of OGS whom are randomly selected in good standing that can serve to decide the facts of the outcome of a decision when both sides/players having presented their evidence and etc.
If no objections are timely raised before the end of the game then both parties forfeit the right to review and the final score stands, this can easy the burden of having clogging up the system etc.
1 Like
No.
4 Likes
I can only assume that TheBeginer was being facetious. His proposal sounds like bringing in truck loads of food for the elephant, and growth hormones. Whereas smurph has graced us with an excellent example of efficient play. Two stones, âNâ and âoâ placed in perfect position with respect to each other.
3 Likes
IIRC, an admin on KGS said the admins did not want that ability. This admin had concerns that admins could be accused of abusing the ability, even when they didnât.
3 Likes
The admins can already be accused of abusing the ability to annul games, or banning people unreasonably, etc. but thatâs part of the whole âjobâ of being an admin; to be an arbiter and show responsibility. If an admin truly behaves unfairly, there are still other admins a player could turn to, who could give their opinion.
And for the few misanthropic trolls that cannot respect a decision made by several admins, I believe there is no hope anyway.
1 Like
This topic was automatically closed 91 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.