Some Greeks are among us, they can’t be against archaeology.
You’d be surprised. The bureaucracy involved into digging the foundation in order to build a house in most places of the country is … well … egregious 
… so, quite a lot of people instinctively shy away from the word. Greek red tape can really create phobias in people.
I’m not sure what is the argument here, commenting in a two-week old thread is digging it up even if OGS sent you an automatic email to let you know about popular threads in the past weeks. It’s not like there was a specific email on this thread inviting you to resume discussion.
This being said, I agree with @KJYD4 that there is nothing wrong with necrobumps so whatever.
I’m more concerned about this kind of statements:
If there is a problem, it is in the player agreeing to time controls that they they would renege. Absolute time is available.
No sane person would play go in absolute time controls, at least not with strangers, as it is can be so easily abused.
More generally, nobody is reneging anything about the chosen time controls. Agreeing on game settings does not mean you suddenly have free reign to abuse them in the most “egregious” ways, denaturing the whole game in the process.
Now of course I think the consensus here was that OP was not in the wrong in his game. Moderators may make wrong calls, and it’s good this was discussed (and overturned), but time controls can definitely be abused.
You’d think that, but chess has two rule against this: if a sequence of moves is repeated three times the players may declare the game a draw, and if there’s 50 moves played without captures or without pawns moving, the players may declare the game a draw. There is no indefinite chess game possible with these rules.
There are indefinite Go games possible depending on the rule set (you’d need a superko rule to prevent infinite games due to things like triple ko). However, in every ruleset it is possible to play games that last more moves than there are atoms in the universe, if both players wish to do so.
Even if one of the players does want to end the game, the other player is usually able to stretch a game that ought to be over in about 300 moves to a game that lasts about 600: one can waste stones by throwing them in the opponent’s territory, one can fill up one’s own territory, one can even let their own stones be captured, and if the opponent is naive enough to capture, you got more enemy territory to waste moves in.
This kind of stalling has nothing to do with the game of Go, and is infuriating to opponents. It prevents them from ending the game short of resigning, while they are actually ahead in score, and nothing the opponent does will change that (it couldn’t even, since at this stage of the game territories are unconditionally alive, and the winning player cannot be killed anymore).
What is the worst?
- Make every Go discussion about chess
0 voters
- Necro threads
- Linguistics detours
Make a poll with only one possible choice.
- Choice 1
0 voters
I think it’s totally awesome that this poll is in fact a linguistic detour (a pollish expression of a sentiment in an idiom that apparently some people understood immediately, and others need to make a detour to explore 
)
Just because it’s interesting and it’s where I came across the archaic version
It’s certainly always fair to at least try a 3-3 invasion!