It’s only a matter of terminology.
To quote the OP:
a really nice way to e.g. end correspondence games where both you and your opponent have lost interest in the game, for whatever reason, and would seek an amiable resolution.
So it could be called the amiable resolution and, as OP wished, not affect the players’ ranks.
In that respect it would be essentially the same as no result.
That’s an annullment, not a draw/jigo. I thought this was the whole purpose of clarifying the terminology, to make this point clear.
If a 5k achieves a draw with a 1d, the 1d is no longer 1d … if those two players agree the game never really happened for some reason (annullment) then the 1d can stay 1d. This is THE difference.
I didn’t mean to suggest that the OP’s suggested feature should be referred to as a draw.
I agree that a draw in a ranked game implies ranking consequences.
This is why I suggest that the proposed feature be called the amiable resolution: the game is recognised as over and that there was a result, which was a mutual decision to abandon it without ranking consequences or the selection of a victor.
That term is far too ambiguous. The players may be quite amiable about a draw (ranked),
We already have two terms - we just need to clarify which we are after:
We should not introduce a new term.
Linguistically, you don’t think that anullment implies that the game wasn’t properly played, eg. because of cheating or sportsmanship issues?
That might not be the message that the amiable players wish to convey.
Also, I guess I’ve been misspelling anullment for a while.
No, anullment means that for whatever reason, this game should be considered as “it never happened”.
This is all that can be read into it, it is precisely what it means, no more, no less.
It can already occur for a wide range of reasons, including people asking mods to do it because they clicked the wrong button in the game setup…
I think you may be confused about the meaning of “draw”.
What you want is the capability to cancel a game, e.g. if you and your opponent have lost interest. That’s not the same as playing out the game and ending with a drawn result, which can happen under Japanese rules if you reach a position allowing a repetition of moves (triple ko is the most obvious but there are others), or which can happen if you end with the same score in rulesets which allow integer komi.
Draws present no problem at all for ranking algorithms. Ranking algorithms now used in Go are based on ranking algorithms developed for chess, which has a lot more draws than Go. It is a long-standing bug in OGS that draws are not handled correctly, but I understand that anoek is fixing this.
Yeah, the real problems seems to be the current tournament system, which cannot understand draws at all. Currently draws are possible, but only by moderator decision, and for elimination tournaments those are sadly counted as blacks victory. :<
Well, it’s not that serious issues but i used to met players on tygem(or is it fox? Sorry, i forgot) they offered me to draw the game even though it is clearly that i was ahead, and when i refuse they don’t resign nor left the game but trolling like without making any moves and let their own times to be depleted. Idk whether they’re trolling or just test my patient so that i left the game first.
I hope people won’t do that frequently when this implemented on OGS
I could fear that too. Really boring to have someone trying to avoid a loss by asking for a draw.
This reminds me of my time playing chess on Lichess at 1200 or so.
I’d win their queen, both rooks, a bishop, the kingside and queenside knights, five, six, seven pawns… then they’d find it in their heart to offer a draw :D
Absolutely! Receiving a draw offer is being flattered
Well but then they could do it only once if the anti-spamming feature is implemented
Well the other way is to say “No I refuse but now it’s double rating points for who wins and it will be my turn to propose you a draw if I want to.”
Gogammon?
Almost as it’s a win not a draw in backgammon
Apropos draw/no result/jigo… I am doing some belated reading on the topic on sensei’s… here are some links, in case this could be useful for future reference:
https://senseis.xmp.net/?Draw
https://senseis.xmp.net/?Jigo
https://senseis.xmp.net/?NoResult
https://senseis.xmp.net/?EternalLife
I wonder if there has ever been any example of eternal life in a game on OGS, btw.
Considering all the players who are going to ask “Oh my cancellation button disappear!” “How can I cancel now?” whatever you explain in FAQ or forum, I am not sure it will do the admin job easier, not to forget that they said they don’t have over charge with cancellation on request.
The more I try to accept the idea the more I find other argument to dislike it:
I can imagine the situation in real life where you have some knowledge of what could happen around (world futbol cup? Birthday party of a local go player?) or on the attitude of your opponent (bored face, check his mobile phone every 2mns) so although that sounds very uncommon, it could result in an annulation. Note that it’s going to be really hard to see this happen in rated games (like tournaments).
Now take online: how can you get that your opponent share the same feeling? I see it embarrassing, I would say even impolite to go suppose that the game is boring for him too or that he has something better to do. Just clicking that button and hoping he shares the same will is most of the case, in a rated game something embarrassing, if not unpolite. If I would have to do it myself, I would be embarrassed first and then I would ask with chat, giving a acceptable reason to stop and even if I don’t have lie a bit maybe? Common minimalistic politeness.
Draws offers from chess are like a necessity, by the game and has to be managed and it’s normal. But cancellation in go is by convenience of at first just one player it’s not needed in itself. In go unlike in chess there is result coming soon enough, there is just a delay in seeing it. So asking a cancellation, unlike in chess, will always be in some way refusing the result (or refusing to get it). So I only see then patience, or resign, in the case of a rated game where the result matters.
If I want to not finish a game, which btw i dunno if it ever happen to me, I will write “sorry I have to go” and resign. As a rare case won’t be a sandbagging problem. Note that if I really have to go, I will propose to pause the game and a date to resume the play. The idea to have that cancel button (and I hope that at least the opponent can refuse) sounds really weird to me.
Of course, we can still find cases of good friends who know each other, play often together and can handle that button without too much worry. But we are limiting the use a lot already here, and for the other cases problems of respect of the other, problems with abuse, or just simply not really well understanding that a game of go has an end to attain, will arise.
After all the attempts to clarify the question of the title in the posts before, I feel strange that it wasn’t yet modified so there could still be a bigger idea (as just cancelling a game with a button during the game) which was underconsidered.
Let’s put aside the jigo bug which is already noted and going to be solved.
There is still that idea that two players may want to consider by themselves during the game that they are as good as each other, that it doesn’t matter if in fact it would be 1 point for black or 2 for white or really a jigo. So then let’s ask for a jigo instead (and a draw as a result which counts, we are talking about rated games).
That’s sounds really weird to me too. The more near of a jigo the result will be, I use to see more motivation to finish the game and know who is the winner. Take the pros, how they carefully play the endgame to the last move even with larger margin like 10 points (instead of resigning). If the game can determine precisely who wins (and with some intensity!) and when compute it precisely to give us the rating, why would we modify it and introduce a scoring at the convenience of the players? Why create a grey zone when it don’t exist? What’s the reason to assimilate a 1 point loss or a 2 point win to a draw? Pure lazyness if you ask me. In anyway to be fair with all the players community who share a rating system and rules of the game, it seems to be incorrect to accept a modification like this in our rated games.
I even didn’t consider players asking for a draw before the middle-game! How a nonsense it sounds to me! Putting away 2/3 of game. And a new huge incentive to sandbagging!
Dan player after 30 moves: " your opening is really good, would you take my draw offer?"
DDK: " O yes, thank you!"
Note (to be clear like in other posts before) I completely agree about draw as a result from a jigo, given at the end of a game, that doesn’t need a button.
Changing the title would make things wierd in the discussion that follows.
It’s not that the words in the title don’t mean what the OP intended.
It’s that the OP was asking for the wrong thing.
A new thread should be started to discuss a Cancel button, if that is a serious request.
If that were done, I predict that the answer is not going to change from “the way to get a game canceled is to report it and ask a moderator” - just my guess. But it’s always fun to debate 
This topic was automatically closed 91 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.