I guess what I’m getting at @ArsenLapin1 is that sure picking some rule and changing it is arbitrary in the sense that the question “why did you pick this one rule and change it that specific way and not another way” might not have a good answer or one that you or I agree with - it’s probably a personal choice.
One can do all sorts of things with go like change the number of players Fractional Multicolour Go and Diplomatic Go or change the scoring of the game Pyramid go 🔺 or change the geometry of board you’re playing on - be that by changing the grid or adding holes/neutrals in the beginning Random Gaps + Pie Rule not to mention all the variants at the variant go server https://go.kahv.io/
It is really all arbitrary in what you choose to change and why, but that doesn’t mean all arbitrary changes are equivalent.
I just thought that while choosing the “obliteration” method is technically an arbitrary choice among others, this one made sense with the context of the capturing stone being neutral though it is played by one player or another.
Equally so I suppose we can object to any or all variants because the original (or some version of it with area scoring) is the best, most interesting, most complex etc.
I think our particular game of Redstone @ArsenLapin1 was probably the most interesting I’ve played so far. I probably should’ve lost with normal go rules, but I found lots of interesting (if objectionable) things came up.