Here is my attempt to make a rule set for go. I think the rules should be as simple as possible, with no artificial ruling for "fairness" is strange situations. If a player is able to play into a counter-intuitive situation that is an advantage for him, why shouldn't that be a win? The beuty of go as I see it is exactly the extremely simple rules leading to complex situations, rather than the rules themselves being complicated.
What I would like is:
Obviously one would not actually need to take every stone of the board before end of the game, but in a dispute this it how it would be settled.
If theese rules is equivalent to another ruleset that I have missed I would like to know.
I need to go now, I will return and clean up this page later, and add some explanations of what i mean.
xela: To me this looks very similar to New Zealand Rules.
Tas: It seems like it. Thanks. No need for special rules defining seki, dead bent four in the corner and stuff like that. I officially like New Zealand rules. :)
Ben: They're closer to the Tromp-Taylor Rules than the New Zealand Rules.