I noticed that, too. 
I’ve talked to someone in a bar about that interview before it happened. AFAIK Stephanie wanted to participate in the Diversity Discussion but couldn’t make it, so maybe the interviewer knew already, that she would agree, and the purpose of the question was mainly about changing to that topic.
1 Like
Oh, what was that?
I’m not saying she would disagree. I’m not a native speaker, but the choice of verb seems off. I would expect “There is a discussion that Go needs more diversity, what are your thoughts” or even directly “How do you think we can make Go more diverse”.
As I said, I’m not a native speaker. 
Yeah, and I’m not saying the question should be phrased that way, but I think given the context it was good enough.
1 Like
By the way, diversity can also be achieved by embracing people who can’t attend in person, like, you know, supporting online Go, but we all know how the EGF feels about that.
4 Likes
Interesting article, but no wonder she took the cultural approach, since that is something that is not mentioned there at all. E.g. Stephanie Yin is from the USA. From a cursory look in the data I had made for a small project in 2021 for marketing inclusion for Spanish speaking people over there in the USA I found that the data suggests that language and culture excludes millions from various markets, not just Go:
Are you saying that language and culture exclude hispanics living in the US from go? How so? I thought that knowing very basic English was enough to read go books (and that people immigrating to an English-speaking country are expected to learn at least basic English at some point). And about culture: go is traditional in a few Asian countries but not in other continents, so hispanics are not culturally exposed to go but non-hispanic whites aren’t either.
No, I am saying what I wrote specifically:
“language and culture excludes millions from various markets, not just Go”
That’s what I wrote, that’s what I mean. Hispanics in USA are just an example of that sort of thing.
Below the USA geographically is Mexico and a lot of other Hispanic-speaking countries, where the majority of inhabitants might not be expected to learn English to the level of being able to study English books.
Isn’t it then a good idea for the AGA to expand to the significant Hispanic population in the USA (which as you said is largely multilingual - around 70% can study a Go book in English) and try to create bi-lingual teaching material and then use that expansion to spread Go to other Hispanic-speaking countries that have hundreds of millions of inhabitants? (Mexico alone is 125+ million people)
How many teaching Go books do they have to read, compared to the vast array that is offered for the English language?
Yes, I know. Which is part of my point. Hispanics are one example. The whole of Africa is also a place where Go has no tradition. How many people live there and do not speak Engish or French (which also has a good amount of teaching materials for Go)? Many many millions.
India and all of Asia west of India has no Go tradition either I think. A couple of billion people right there.
One example is just one example. 
Culture barriers, language barriers and the lack of funding are the three main problems that “spreading Go” has to deal with.
1 Like
From your link I estimate that 84% of Hispanics in the US know enough English to read a go book, so I’d say language is not the main barrier.
In fact, being able to study a book is not even necessary, you just need to learn the rules and that’s it. One major obstacle to spreading go is that the game may be perceived as elitist. We need more casual players, six-year olds who play with their grandmother on Sundays.
The link posted by Jon_Ko says “Beginners Only events have the potential of attracting more diverse players”. Perhaps “beginner” is not the exact term, I’d prefer “casual player” (20k or weaker). People who have been playing 1-2 games a month for 20 years without studying wouldn’t become stronger than 20k, but shouldn’t be called “beginners”, and should be welcome to play at go events.
I participate in the organization of youth competitions in France and I see that many parents who bring their children to go competitions don’t play go themselves. My guess is that the situation is similar in other countries. So perhaps a starting point could be to encourage them to play casually, without pressure to become competitive.
Perhaps from a strong player this will finally get traction, because when I’m trying this argument I just get the “… Or y’all could just improve” treatment.
3 Likes
Reading <> Studying.
We are a bit more academically inclined and multilingually apt in this forum than the average internet dwelling, so we tend to forget how daunting it can be for a lot of people to decide to study something in a foreign language. Even reading a page can be a challenge, let alone a whole book, even if that book is a recreational novel, let alone a teaching manual.
Yeah, so elitist that you even have to learn a foreign language at a high fluency level, in order to learn more than the rules.
I won’t argue with that and I totally agree with that being a great goal, but how will the grandmothers learn (of) the game?
Here is the value of books then. Just learning the rules and playing once in a blue moon would, indeed produce that result, and I will totally agree with you.
Suddenly those casual players might go “hey this is fun, I want to learn more!” and what will they be given? “A Learn to Read Basic English” book?
If you disagree with that, then is Stephanie Yin’s toil for nothing then? (the underlining is mine):
Or maybe some people just love books and there is something more efficient in spreading Go and they cannot just can’t think of it. That is a possiblity, but the underlying problem remains.
Do note that she is telling all that about English, where hundreds of books about Go are available.
Now imagine how difficult teaching/promoting Go is when there is nothing available.
Whom will they play with?
What events?
Do you realise that I have not played Go on a real board, vs a real opponent in my whole life?
I’ve known about Go for more than a decade and I’ve been actively learning and playing for 7 years now (my first ranked game was in Aug 2016) and my real life games are zero.
Promoting Go where it already exists (on some level or another) is a totally different problem than trying to include a new country/culture/language to the fold.
And that is great! I’ve always said that the best marketing/promotion is towards parents and children.
Alas no. It is probably like that in some countries that already have a good amount of Go players (e.g. Germany or Romania). For most other countries, no, it is not like that.
1 Like
It’s hard to answer to you because I don’t know what you are talking about. You mentioned Hispanics living in the US, i.e. a group of people who generally know basic English and live in a country which already has some amount of go activity, and then you talk about other countries like Greece who have almost no go players. I won’t talk about Greece since I’m not familiar with the subject, but about countries like the US, France or Germany, which already have a go organization, but whose go population lacks diversity: most go players are white males with some scientific background, so people who don’t have this profile may believe they don’t fit in that group, or that the game is too complicated, or made for geek-minded people. In addition, Go organizations mostly care about organizing competitions, so people who accompany competitors (like mothers of young players) don’t have anything to do and are bored.
So if we could spread the message that go is just a board game that is simple to learn and that anyone can play, this could improve diversity. Currently, the situation is that people who have learned the rules of chess, checkers or Reversi believe that go is not for them, the game is too esoteric.
A few years ago my mother (who was about 75 years old) wanted me to explain her the rules of chess. I told her that go is simpler and that I am more familiar with go but no, she believed that go was too complicated so I reluctantly explained her the rules of chess.
I wasn’t talking about people who live in a non-English speaking country but about a group of people who are immigrants or descendants of immigrants in an English-speaking country. They are exposed to English in everyday life anyway, and if they don’t speak basic English yet, then learning the language of the country where they live is more important than learning to play go.
1 Like
I am so confused by this debate 
millions in the U.S. don’t speak English very well.
language is not the main barrier to the growth of Go in the U.S.
(paraphrases, not quotes)
Both of these statements can be true at the same time.
2 Likes
Yes, because as I said, you are focusing on one example (a tree) and you are missing the bigger picture (the forest), which is this:
“Isn’t it then a good idea for the AGA to expand to the significant Hispanic population in the USA (which as you said is largely multilingual - around 70% can study a Go book in English) and try to create bi-lingual teaching material and then use that expansion to spread Go to other Hispanic-speaking countries that have hundreds of millions of inhabitants? (Mexico alone is 125+ million people)”
That’s what I am talking about. A simple marketing proposal for expansion to a totally new market.
You want diversity, there it is, a new target group of an extra few hundred million people.
(similarly my other example about India and west of it. A couple of billion people live there, from a vastly diverse array of cultures.)
If other people think that this is the first or more important step for expanding Go or getting it to be more diverse, that’s fine with me. Did I ever say “no” to that issue or argued against people doing it? No, I didn’t.
They just want to focus on totally different target groups and that’s fine (it is their time and goal after all - they can obviously do what they want).
And all I am saying is that people living in different countries and speak different languages and have no local Go culture are a significantly larger target group to expand to. (this is why I put my time and thoughts towards that goal.)
That’s all there is to it. I honestly do not see how such a simple point is a matter of debate.
The point is that the go federation of a country X doesn’t care about players in country Y. So if they want more players/more diverse players, they will take action for country X, not country Y.
1 Like
Four points on that:
a) That is why I mentioned the EGF first and foremost.
b) The meeting that was mentioned took place in the European Go Congress. If it was a meeting made in the annual National congregation of a single country, noone would have brought this issue up at all.
c) In my best of knowledge the AGA, which was later mentioned due to Stephanie Yin’s remarks, does not care whether you live in the USA or not, in order to be a member. You can enlist there and play online to some of their events and they will not say no to a foreigner paying for an AGA membership. This means that they have the ability to expand - or help Go expand - to those markets and they will benefit a lot from it since they have the “know how” on organising and promoting.
d) The idea of wanting to promote the game to as many people as possible and be more diverse and at the same time strictly adhere to borders seems odd and contradicting to me (especially in this digital interconnected era we live in). E.g. It makes sense that the French Go Association doesn’t pry into what goes on in Germany, which has its own association of comparable size (ergo, so far so good on that), but would you say that just because it is set in France, it shouldn’t care about the idea of promoting Go to the millions of French speaking people that live in countries other than France and do not have their own Go associations? ( that target group numbers a couple of hundred million people, if I am not mistaken. Comparably, France has 68 million inhabitants)
P.S.
Googling “aga membership” and automatically hitting the first link without looking, was funny. 
I don’t know if they should or not, the fact is that they don’t care.
1 Like
Thank you for letting me know the fact of the matter.
I do not care/mind if they (or EFG or AGA or whatever other organisation) do not care about the whole thing currently.
That is why people brainstorm or make/attend meetings like the one mentioned above, so that new ideas can be presented and discussed
No thread on the new sounds?
What new sounds?
