What's a good bounty to implement Rengo?

I’d be willing to donate money for this purpose, questions:

  • are there already plans to implement Rengo?
  • are there already donations specifically for implementing Rengo?
  • how much would be needed?
  • how long would it take the devs to implement approximately?

Yes, anoek agrees it would be a good feature to have one day, that day just hasn’t come yet.

No, donations are not currently user allocated. anoek has sole control over deciding how all current donations are distributed. I do not know his position on the idea of feature bounties, I suspect he’s probably against them but do not wish to put words in his mouth.

If this question has an answer at all, only anoek could guess to what it may be.

See above.

Thanks for the interesting information.
“Anoek” is the owner of OGS?

I would then hereby make a start by offering USD 1000 for Rengo implementation if it is finished within 3 months after officially accepting of a rengo-implementation deal by the OGS owner/maintainers.



1 Like

Technically matburt is co-founder, but at this point in time anoek is effectively a solo-developer as matburt has been very busy with the job that pays him money :stuck_out_tongue:

FYI, weekends are family time, so I suspect he won’t see this discussion until Monday morning US time.


Just throwing some hypothetical questions out there…

Are you open to other people contributing to this bounty to further incentivise anoek? Or would you prefer to discuss the possible price and timing between the two of you to theoretically give you greater influence over how rengo gets implemented, if at all. (Note, this is not a commitment on anoek’s part, simply an inquiry to your desires and intentions.)

I’m open for all suggestions or contributions.
My intention was just to state that there needs to be some kind of time frame and it should not be “open-end” development that might never see the light of the day, so I picked something arbitrary for starters.


Yeah that’s fair enough, just wanted to double check. I think if the idea of putting money towards the feature is being considered, an agreed upon time frame should certainly be part of the negotiation. I look forward to seeing what he says :slightly_smiling_face: good luck

Would you offer a bounty to turn off analysis in auto match games? I’ll contribute $100 to that.


I just want to focus on getting this Rengo feature in that people complain about for 9 years and that nothing has been done about. The automatch thing isn’t impacting me personally. However, I heard some people claiming that OGS currently has a bad exploit that you won’t lose rating if you just time out instead of resigning / losing by scoring. At least in tournament games. If this is true, it should probably be very high priority on the list, but again that isn’t my primary goal at this time and also nothing that we should pay for :-p.
So sorry, I’m only really interested in the social rengo feature because friends and I like to play Rengo and we can’t here.
But I think you could start a new thread about the automatch thing and maybe people will chime in.


This doesn’t require any work, so a bounty wouldn’t make much sens. It’s just a political decision to have it on by default (a decision I very much disagree with, and which seems rather unpopular based on the polls, but that’s another debate).

A bounty for new features requiring significant work like Rengo is a nice put-your-money-where-your-mouth-is idea though, and if it can help pushing Rengo out I’m all for it.



Rather than a bounty system, perhaps the site supporters should be able to vote on which future features they wish to see prioritized.

1 Like

I think it’s up to anoek to decide what to work on; it’s his site, he doesn’t really have to answer to anybody in this regard. In a certain way site supporters already voted on whatever has been implemented in the past as being worthy of their contribution.


Well, I think viewing the supporters as voting with their contribution is a type of feedback that looks back at what has already been done, whereas I’m suggesting that the supporters be able to offer feedback of what they would most like to see in the future. Of course, it is entirely up to anoek to decide at the end of the day, but this type of feedback might be useful or interesting for him.

Several years ago, OGS was using UserVoice to allow everyone to vote on future features. However, our account on that system suddenly went offline, without much explanation as to why.

I guess GitHub Issues fills somewhat similar needs, but the idea of voting for top issues and feature requests is not so well emphasized on such a platform. I mean, people could indicate support for certain ideas with the reaction emojis, but that’s not the main aim of the interface and not so reliable to gauge the broader public opinion.


I’m very against some kind of general feature voting system. I can easily envision a situation where anoek needs to justify why he worked on feature y when it was voted less highly than feature x. I’m not comfortable with that situation. This is not a democracy and we are not his board. He takes great care to consider what features are often requested when he decides on development direction, but I’m sure that’s not all that goes into it (nor should it be).

On the other hand, isolated bounties that he can either choose to pick up or not at any given time, feels much more in balance with the current way of things.


It’s worth noting that such a system actually used to exist for several years. Starting back in 2014, anoek set up a UserVoice account for managing OGS feature requests.

I don’t think what you are concerned about ever became an issue with that system. Ultimately, I think the community understood that the highest voted features do not necessarily get worked on first, but rather it is all just feedback and data for anoek to consider in making the decision.


IIRC that system never really took off anyway and people just kept suggesting things here for the most part :man_shrugging: I joined early 2017 and was very active in the forums and didn’t hear about uservoice until it died I think :thinking:

If anoek is for it that’s fine, I just personally have reservations about what it could evolve into. It’s entirely possible that won’t be the case :heart:

1 Like

It was quite active in the first couple of years of it being online. I remember using it, adding some suggestions, and voting for things. However, over time, I think some people forgot that it existed, and I think the biggest downside was having to go to separate site, with a separate login, and the existence of it was not well advertised, so it gradually evolved back into people just making forums posts, up until it disappeared for some reason that seemed to surprise anoek as well:


There are some feature suggestions on GitHub. You can find popular ones by going to this list of issues and sorting by thumbs up count:

Here’s the one for Rengo:

Log in there and give it a thumbs up. Two more and it will be on top!