I didn’t noticed until now, when you finish a game, instead of counting it asks if you accept the AI result or something like that, and a winning %. If you accept game finish directly, and result say something like “White wins by server decission”
I searched and can’t find anything about this in the forums and/or documentation. Somebody can explain how this works exactly?
Just out of curiosity, but is it possible that both players at exact the same moment in time accept this decision?
I suspect that only one of the players has to accept that decision to make it stand.
Shouldn’t by “one or more players” be replaced by “by one of the players”?
Sorry, feeling a bit pedantic today 
This is exactly what the text says. “one or more” is equivalent to “at least one”.
I think @Atorrante’s point is that there’s never really a case where two players have hit the accept button. Therefore we can drop the “or more” part
Exactly what Joe, uh @benjito says.
FWIW I suspect that the server can receive two accepts, because it’s all asynchronous 
Idk, I heard OGS isn’t using asynchronous features of JavaScript yet…
Hang on, does only one person get offered this 
I think it does show to both, but… logically, I believe it should only show to one player.
Any network request is asynchronous, is it not? Maybe I’m misunderstanding …
search around the forums for “asynchronous JavaScript” 
it has been suggested that OGS start using it, but I’m not sure if they ever took the suggestion
My understanding is that JavaScript is single threaded, but the event loop allows for asynchronous processes being used in web applications (including OGS).
Also i suspect you may be memeing, but I’m hesitant to join because these posts are public.
Lol fine I’ll be serious 
all of what you said is correct. Also some portion of the backend is Python so JS threading model isn’t as relevant.
Returning to the Atorrante’s question:
My apologies. I’m just cautious with joking in public threads, where it might cause confusion to people who don’t recognise it as such.
Hello,
I just played a 13x13 game where there was a bent-four-in-the-corner.
My opponent first thought it was seki. We were playing under Japanese rules but there were only three ko threats on the board and I was winning by a large margin, so I didn’t mind losing the six points of territory of playing it out, and I think it would have been much more satisfying both for me and my opponent to play it out rather than just get a win by server decision.
So after we disagreed on the status of that group, I clicked the “resume game” button.
And to speed things up, I used the autoplay to enter the whole sequence (removing three ko threats and playing out the bent four ko).
But somehow the game resumed with me having already passed once. So when my opponent passed, we immediately went to scoring again. (My opponent was right to pass, whether or not he thought the group was seki, there was no move for him on the board).
After we disagreed a second time on the status of the group, I clicked the resume game button again. This time the game restarted with me on turn, so I played the first move (removing a ko threat) and entered the rest of the sequence in the autoplay.
My opponent played the sequence almost to the end, and passed when his group was in atari.
We both passed and the game went to scoring. This time we agreed that the group was dead.
But now the game is marked as “won by server decision” instead of won by points.
What happened? Was the anti-stalling feature triggered erroneously? My opponent did pass several times, but only when they had to (at some times of the sequence they have to play, but at other times they have to pass, and the only alternative would be to fill their own territory).
As your opponent passed at least three times, and AI determined the score was clear, OGS probably presented them with the possibility to end the game by server decision. In which case you should have received the same message (even if you didn’t click it), didn’t you?
This seems to be the case, but a bit absurd that the losing party is shown the “server decision” button. That button is meant to prevent stalling, but the losing player has always been free to resign.
No, I didn’t receive anything. In fact I saw the game going to scoring. The only thing I clicked were the dead stones and the accept button after marking the dead stones as dead.
In this case, they had no reason to resign unless they counted the points very precisely (I’m ahead by a large margin because the bent four is dead, but it would have been a close game if it had been a seki instead).
It’s possible that they still thought it was a seki when they got the stalling notification? In this case they would have not understood why I “wasted” three moves removing ko threats from my territory, and when presented with the notification they might have believed that I was the one stalling?
Anyway, I was ahead on the board, and they are the ones who passed several times, so I don’t think the anti-stalling mechanism should have triggered at all. My understanding is that the anti-stalling mechanism should only trigger if the losing player keeps playing when the winning player passes. For this game it was the other way around: the losing player was passing while the winning player was capturing the stones.
