Put me on the list too...

Nothingness:

Nothingness:
Look at White moves 58 and 59
You'll see the 5 moves from i1 to h1
Then from h1 to i1
It violates the rule that a piece cannot move back to the square it had vacated on the previous move..

sorry but there is no illegal move in the game celtic jim posted. everything was within the rules.

Dark Prince:
What would be the point of having such a list otherwise?

Chaos:
The agreement is indicated by having the name on the list.
Once the name is on the list, it will be up to the player against whom the illegal move was made to decide how to proceed and agreement by the opponent won't be needed if it's clear that an illegal move was in fact made.

Chaos:
I'd prefer the bug were fixed and this wouldn't be an issue.
I don't intend to have games against players that aren't skilled enough to know a move is illegal or that a particular position could lead to such a move.
A player can look at the previous move prior to beginning the move and look at the move list during the move to verify that all pieces are moving according to the rules.
Anyone who doesn't want to risk making the agreement certainly doesn't have to.
Nevertheless, I don't mind adding to the description:
It will be at the players discretion against whom the illegal move was made to either ask the opponent to resign or allow the opponent the opportunity to have the illegal move reversed.

Dark Prince: Personally I'd prefer reversing the move if there are no side effects like identification (in whatever way) of pieces. Both players should agree ofcourse.

Dark Prince:
Slight change in wording for description so intent is not implied. That is if the illegal move is unintentional, inadvertent or unknown to the player, the agreement stands.
"I hereby agree to resign any game against another player on this list if during the course of the game any piece of mine is moved back to the square it had vacated on the previous move."

Pedro Martínez:
YEAH...
That's enough for me, however unlikely it may be, to go with the list and agreement by opponents to resign in case an illegal move is made.

refers to identification by SPY, but also indirect identification.
i.e. a "1" runs up on a bomb and explodes identifies that piece as a bomb narrowing the choices to attack to destroy the BASE.

Dark Prince: Unless Fencer is on a vacation or something, the reversal will definitely not take longer than a few days.
I believe your assumption would be correct indeed. The problem with undesired identification of pieces would have to be taken as an inevitable side effect though.

Pedro Martínez:
If reported to Fencer by Private Message, would it take hours, days or weeks to reverse an illegal move?
Would I be correct in assuming it would still be reversed even if several moves had been made since it was reported? The potential problem with previously unidentied pieces would apply here too.

Dark Prince, Chaos:

Have such moves been reversed?
Yes, they have.

How long does it take?
It depends on the method of reporting the illegal move. It takes Fencer much less time (and effort) if reported to him directly via PM than if reported in the BugTracker (or at least this is what my experience tells me).

What happens if unidentified pieces become identified as a result of the illegal move?
I have no idea. Good question though. :)

Pedro Martínez: Is it at all possible to have the move reversed? At BK some things seem to be impossible while they seem logical and wanted, like the next round of a tournament starting as soon as the winners of the previous round are known. In that case we have to wait untill all games of the previous round have finished, whether or not their outcome is relevant. That's why I wonder if it's possible to have a move reversed. My guess is it can't.

Chaos:
based on your post and that of Pedro, I agree.
No date should be necessary and leave out the part in the parenthesis on the description.

Pedro Martínez:
As I understand it, a player may inadvertently make an illegal move due to the bug that would otherwise be impossible. More critically, in certain positions with few remaining movable pieces, a player may be forced to make the illegal move which would otherwise be prevented without the bug.
In either case, a player may have a legitimate argument that the illegal move was unintentional. With the list, voluntary resignation is agreed upon without involving a moderator or management and no move reversal is necessary.

Have such moves been reversed?
How long does it take?
What happens if unidentified pieces become identified as a result of the illegal move?

Chaos: Well, people who have accounts and play at BK are deemed to have agreed to the User Agreement and to the rules of all games that are played here. My understanding is that when my opponent (or anyone else on this site) makes an illegal move (i.e. a move which is not in agreement with the rules applicable to BK games), I am fully entitled to require the management to have such a move reversed. Therefore, I think the list of “obligated players” is rather redundant since they are obligated to that effect (not to make illegal moves) already.

For me the date is irrelevant. Fine by me if the rule applies to any of the games I'm playing already. But I'm perfectly ok with your definition if people prefer to have the dates added.

Chaos:
I would also like to see a date by the name of each player for when they are added to the list and suggest the following for the wording:
"I hereby agree to resign any game against another player on this list (in which both players have an effective date on or before the start of the game) if during the course of the game I move any piece back to the square it had vacated on the previous move."

Pedro Martínez: as I understand they have agreed to resign the game. Best would be if the bug would be fixed ofcourse, or if we could at least get back to the previous move so the game could go one.

So, umm, what happens if an “obligated player” makes an illegal move?

ok, so I made a startlist. Anyone who wants to be added (or removed) from the list, just post here or send me a message. I'll add the circumstances as soon as we have agreed how to describe it.

Dark Prince: Rather than "clutter" the top of the board with several names, such as you describe, the better way would be to have one post, listing all the names. Then a link directly to that post, could be placed at the top. That post could be edited at any time by Chaos. (Or whoever does the post, AND any moderator)

In each post, you see a "Link" link under the date. If Chaos copies that URL and puts it at the top of this board, telling what it is, anyone can click it and see the up to date list of people agreeing.

It's pretty simple, but if any assistance is needed, just let me know. (Or any other Global Moderator, really)

I'll send her a message directly to find out how to proceed.
Thanks

I think Chaos could put names of obligated players on the top of this forum.

lukulus:
I think a list would avoid any confusion about who has made such an agreement or not and with whom. It would be unfortunate to play thinking we had such an agreement and the opponent saying no. Why ask before or during each game when a list would be so clear in advance?
Could such a list or link to the list be placed in such a location that it would be easily accessible both at the time it's made and into the future without doing some kind of search?

I think most players will accept such gentleman's agreement and weaker ones will lose with sooner, than such situation can happen.

Dark Prince:
postscript:
That agreement would not apply to players on the list who are playing against someone not on the list since those not on the list haven't agreed.

One can move into a position in which the only allowed move for a particular piece on the following turn is an illegal one (moving back to the square it had vacated the previous turn).
If that piece must be moved due to attrition,
I would think it fair to agree that any player who moves into such a position and is subsequently forced to make an illegal move should resign even if it results from attrition caused by the opponent that turn.
Naturally, our tactics would be affected to avoid getting into such a position. Unfortunately, however, such a position may otherwise be advantageous if the bug didn't allow illegal moves.
Perhaps we should have a list of players who agree to resign a game in which they make an illegal move whether intentionally or inadvertantly.

cookie monster:

I promise the same. :-)

Dark Prince:

I can promise not to move back if you want to play. :)

-Eric

Pedro Martínez:
Sooooo..."very soon" means???
LOL
Thanks for the info.

Dark Prince: No worries, it will have been fixed with the introduction of BK 3.0… which is expected to take place very soon… or has been for the past two years…

Celticjim:
Thanks for your response.
Although I don't care for the game graphics or move tracking here, it's the bug that causes me the greatest reluctance to play here. There are many very good espionage players here I would challenge if the bug were resolved.

Dark Prince:

According to the rules, a piece cannot move back to the square it moved from on the previous move. As I understand it, there was a bug that allowed such moves in certain circumstances. Has that bug been fixed?

I'm suffering from a little burnout and have been moving very slowly. plus i have lots of responsibilities at work that are very important. New career = more responsibility.

SL-Mark: Yeah, it so :)

Mikong: Thought I had been excluded as I didn't see any game! Ah no, I only have a bye

Mikong: Good Luck to all! :)

Finally, the tournament began ! :)

SL-Mark: I meant people can play fast, if they are forced to. But some players do not understand how fisher clock works until they forfeit. But its not about slow moving:) Personally I like fischer clock. I realized, if I am playing espionage games faster, I am playing them better:)

I am in.

lukulus: Quite, if you have a long list of games, I would imagine it to be quite onerous to look out for certain games. And having so many games almost forces you to play every day... shorter time control will simply mean that the game is at the top of your list more often.
Didn't understand your point on fisher clock. Is this form of time control a problem to many?
Hope you join in too :)

SL-Mark: You are right. I am quite slow player, sometimes quite a lot concerning to SL standards and I have "only" about 300 games. Simply its not comfortable to seek for some special game. Fischers clock games appears themselfs rather soon and for huge majority of BK members its not problem to play near every day if they must:)

Chaos: Also be mindful of the fact, that with weekends set, two slow players can result in only two full moves per week!
We know that asking people to move fast is pointless (Nothingness tourny demonstrates that).

An alternative permutation would be fisher clock with setting 28hours/14hours/2days which would squeeze out a few more moves from the slow players.

Chaos: Only that this tournament will be at the top of the list more frequently! I would have made this an open tournament, the time control would weed out the slow movers quickly. It must be a hassle sending out all those invites, but I would invite all the usual suspects :) Put a post in the tournament board advertising the tournament and calling on people to contact you if they want to join.

SL-Mark: having 100+ games is a choice... If they think they can keep up with this tournament they can enter - do give me suggestions!