On 05/17/2013 07:31 PM, Petr Baudis wrote:
I don't see any requirement to move to moderation, mailman can
unsubscribe and/or block individual sender addresses just fine.
Thanks, I wasn't aware of that.
So with that in mind, I'll toss in a kick vote too.
The bigger problem is that this is
On 05/17/2013 03:22 PM, Mark Boon wrote:
More plugs disguised as an apology. Very clever :)
I vote in favor of kicking these guys off the list.
The list isn't moderated, so it's a big deal to move to moderation and
figure out what that entails. We can either put up with it (and put the
guy
On 11/08/2012 08:10 PM, Henry Hu wrote:
Thanks all.
Now I've been working on a web Go game. My purpose is to connect to
some Go server for providing users with extended functionalities. Is
there any public Go server available? I knew IGS' protocol was also
proprietary.
IGS allows 3rd party
On 07/12/2012 10:22 AM, Don Dailey wrote:
The real point of this is to impose a more western attitude to the game,
trying to crush your opponent - pick off every possible stone you can,
etc.
That's overly dramatic and political. Eastern players don't throw away
points like
On 01/15/2012 10:18 AM, Michael Williams wrote:
Kibitzing anything in that room is pointless for all the noise.
For both games, I set up a clone game with moderated chat where only
dans could kibitz. Unfortunately, at best it only had 10% participation
(based on observer counts) and the
On 01/15/2012 03:19 PM, Richard J. Lorentz wrote:
In case you cannot get the listing next to the unmoderated one, will I
still be able to easily find your moderated game by just scrolling the
list of games and looking for tromp vs. zen19n, presumably with an extra
tag or flag or something?
It
for the
unmoderated game.
On 01/15/2012 03:03 PM, Jeff Nowakowski wrote:
On 01/15/2012 10:18 AM, Michael Williams wrote:
Kibitzing anything in that room is pointless for all the noise.
For both games, I set up a clone game with moderated chat where only
dans could kibitz. Unfortunately, at best it only had 10
On 01/12/2012 08:19 PM, Darren Cook wrote:
It seems to have bounced back from the vicmorrow loss. Perhaps John can
learn something from that game ;-)
He's not going to learn much unless he takes a 4 stone handicap. This
vicmorrow guy is, more than likely and sadly, the same sandbagger that
On 01/09/2012 11:54 AM, Jim O'Flaherty, Jr. wrote:
Of course I am making this up. The point is that the assumption that
a single account is associated with exactly one human who is the same
human to play on that account. Additionally, there are those out
there in the human world who don't value
On 01/02/2012 05:04 PM, Rémi Coulom wrote:
Improving the KGS rank at 5d is very difficult. The current
experimental version of Crazy Stone wins 78% against Crazy Stone
2011. That's less than one stone difference on KGS. But I am sure
both Zen and Crazy Stone will reach 6d in 2012.
There are
On 01/07/2012 02:59 PM, Nick Wedd wrote:
If this is the user I think it is, there are too many losses for it to
be coincidence.
Yes, he lost dozens of games in a row. After I sent my message to the
admin, he then won a couple. Coincidence? Seems unlikely.
I am suspicious, but at 3k I am
On 01/07/2012 03:07 PM, Jouni Valkonen wrote:
Jeff, it does not matter what ten humans does with the games, because
they are insignificant compared to bulk mass of games that gobots are
playing. therefore CS's it has no relevance for the rating system.
Maybe, but you may be underestimating how
On 01/31/2011 09:12 PM, David Doshay wrote:
Does anyone on this list use this software?
Its use requires disabling anti-virus software.
The author of that software has made violent threats to members of the
Go community. Whether it will harm your computer or not for me is
besides the point
I like the idea, though for sure it would take extra work. I like the
idea of some kind of Bang Neki tournament even more. It was discussed
previously on the list:
http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.games.devel.go/20580
The best bots are already playing well. Who would have imagined a 1d bot
5
On 01/22/2011 08:53 AM, Nick Wedd wrote:
I prefer to leave things as they are.
It would be nice to have one 9x9 event as integer komi. It's good to
leave room for a little experimentation.
___
Computer-go mailing list
Computer-go@dvandva.org
On 01/02/2011 10:17 AM, Erik van der Werf wrote:
The playout policy I used in the 2007 version of Steenvreter was
developed independently of the Mogo policy.
Did this policy include the idea of sequences (playing near the last
move), and if so, was that developed independently?
Memories
On 01/02/2011 05:24 PM, Erik van der Werf wrote:
Agreed, as long as you don't deny things that were out there long
before someone wrote 'the' paper. I have seen a rather natural
progression from work of Brugman, Kaminski, Bouzy, Helmstetter,
Hamlen, etc. to where we are today. Pinpointing the
On 12/30/2010 08:20 PM, Aja wrote:
Hi Jeff,
When, do you think, did Mogo started dominating all the KGS computer
events and CGOS, and also was the first to extend that dominance from
9x9 to 19x19.?
Hello Aja,
Here I quote from the computer-go archives, unless otherwise noted:
Dec. 31, 2006:
On 12/31/2010 07:31 AM, Rémi Coulom wrote:
I'd like to advise against using the exact algorithm I described in
my 2006 paper. I compared it to UCT at that time, and UCT performed
better. I am sorry I don't have a reference to my data any more. I
posted the results to the mailing list. It used
On 12/30/2010 01:58 PM, David Fotland wrote:
You should also give more credit to CrazyStone as an early strong program
that contributed many ideas, comparable to Mogo. Remi is Aja's advisor, so
Erica continues the CrazyStone thread.
I did mention CrazyStone, and the Sensei's page lists it
On 12/30/2010 06:10 PM, Michael Williams wrote:
Perhaps the client viewer should have the ability to hide comments by
rank. Then anyone can be allowed to post, as long as they know that
not everyone will hear them.
The problem with that is you end up with a bunch of disjointed chat
(people
On 11/18/2010 06:08 PM, Hideki Kato wrote:
9x9 Go tournament
Rules: Round-robin, area scoring, simple ko, no sucide, 7.0 komi, 10
min each.
Participants: All but Zen (6 programs).
Results: 1st Aya, 2nd Coldmilk, 3rd Nomitan.
Sorry for the late reply. Are the games available for these results?
On 09/26/2010 07:36 PM, Darren Cook wrote:
*: For most of the other strong programs the losses were as black, so
the 7.5pt komi is too high hypothesis still stands.
So does the 6.5 komi is too low hypothesis.
___
Computer-go mailing list
On 09/14/2010 04:36 PM, terry mcintyre wrote:
From my observations of human-versus-bot games, a winning strategy against bots
seems to be:
Create several capturing races, even if you lose all of them.
Is there an established, reliable way to create capturing races against
bots?
On 07/23/2010 08:02 AM, Erik van der Werf wrote:
Well, first of all I think in normal games players should be free to
chose any komi they like. Of course for rated games there may be some
restrictions but on KGS those don't apply to 9x9 anyway (9x9 games are
not rated).
Is this just a problem
On 06/02/2010 01:14 PM, Don Dailey wrote:
Why are you comparing humans to computers?It's ridiculous to measure
progress by comparing to the top human players.What we care about is how
much progress we can make from year to year.
Come on Don, you know that the top players are the gold
On 06/02/2010 05:40 PM, Peter Drake wrote:
Are the older archives available somewhere?
You can find archives at gmane:
http://blog.gmane.org/gmane.games.devel.go
___
Computer-go mailing list
Computer-go@dvandva.org
On 06/02/2010 05:49 PM, Don Dailey wrote:
Equaling humans is an arbitrary and very long term goal, but it should not
define how hard or easy something is and should not define what works
and what doesn't work. That's my beef.
Yet you say in another message that it's a natural measuring
28 matches
Mail list logo
