Issues with passing

[jberrier]

I have a game right now which I'm pretty sure I have won. When my opponent was set to designate dead stones, he didn't do so, which would give him the win. I'm sure it was a mistake, so I didn't accept the designation and told him that dead stones need to be marked. I made it clear when designating disagreement that I want to be able to designate dead stones upon 2 passes. But it looks like he set it so that dead stones would be marked as living upon 2 consecutive passes.

So, after he passes again, I try to pass and get the message:

"Are you sure?
Are you sure you want to pass ?

ATTENTION! If both players pass in succession then any stones remaining on the board are deemed alive for counting the score at end of the game"

I assume if I do this, then the few isolated stones in my large territory will be marked as living, and therefore my large territory wouldn't count. I don't understand why this has to be such a confusing issue here. The territory boundaries are very clear in this case. I just want to end this game and get a proper score. What do I need to do to finish this, so that I can designate the dead stones?

Table number is 712836505 for reference. Thanks!

EDIT: The opponent appears to keep choosing "does not want a designate a dead stones period after two consecutive passes" I don't know if he is doing this on purpose or if perhaps there is a language or game misunderstanding, but this is ridiculous if one player can "hold a game hostage" because he or she doesn't want a designate a dead stones phase!

[Shivaware]

I'm not super familiar with all the online go implementations, but I'm pretty sure that BGA cannot determine dead stones and it must rely on the players to agree. None of the disputed territories will be counted if the dead stones are not removed.

That means you are going to have to capture all of the white stones in your territory. Luckily, the AGA rules are in effect, so this will not reduce your score. Hopefully, your opponent does not start adding a bunch more stones in your territory and you can end the game after the existing stones are removed.

[Gulchen]

The ability to avoid a subsequent ​ ​ ​ designate dead stones ​ ​ ​ phase
is specifically to stop players from ​ ​ ​ holding a game hostage ​ :

If the opponent didn't have that ability, then a player could just
keep designating stones in a way which would give that player the win.

(You seem to now be doing this, but just in case, I'm still mentioning:
Capture your opponent's dead stones.)

[jberrier]

The ability to avoid a subsequent ​ ​ ​ designate dead stones ​ ​ ​ phase
is specifically to stop players from ​ ​ ​ holding a game hostage ​ :

If the opponent didn't have that ability, then a player could just
keep designating stones in a way which would give that player the win.

(You seem to now be doing this, but just in case, I'm still mentioning:
Capture your opponent's dead stones.)

So, it's clear now that the opponent wasn't doing this on purpose. I explained that I just need to capture his remaining pieces and he can just keep passing. It seems like the opponent mistakenly chose "have no designate dead stones phase" and it doesn't appear there is a way to change such a decision when made. My question, then, is why is this even an option? It seems it would just be easier to have a "counter offer" if there is a disagreement on designation of dead stones. His mistake was not designating dead stones (which appears to be accidental) and then choosing NOT to have a designate dead stones phase, meaning that even one or two of his dead stones in my area would cause my entire territory to chose as his.

I've read up on the AGA rules a bit, and it generally seems to make sense, though I think I'll try to find some applied examples on the internet to show how it works in practice and better understand. My apologies if I'm missing something obvious here, as I do find some of the intricacies of scoring systems and situations like this to be somewhat confusing.

[Gulchen]

it doesn't appear there is a way to change such a decision when made.

I am not the developer for BGA's Go implementation: ​ You could try asking https://boardgamearena.com/player?id=6870632 for this.
(I imagine stst might be able to put such an option into something like the upper-right dot-dot-dot menu in Hex.)

My question, then, is why is this even an option?

to stop players from holding a game hostage: ​ How else would you get your win if your
opponent rejected your counter-offer(s) and kept marking all of your stones as dead?

(Bear in mind that BGA's mods most likely have no knowledge about the game Go.)

[Gulchen]

Now that the game is over, I'm adding two comments about it.


(a) ​ ​ ​ White probably didn't - and wouldn't even if Black had played S1 - have a good-enough
ko threat to exploit this, but still: ​ The end position was not settled, due to the potential throw-in at K1.

(b) ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ Even aside from that, Black should've played K1 and K2, to force
White to protect against ​ ​ ​ black O4 ​ . ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ( https://senseis.xmp.net/?Teire )