If stalemate were worth 0.6 or 0.8 points, there would be plenty of those instead of dead draws. If I recall correctly, at least two of the games so far had a forced stalemate available.
Which side do you propose get more than half a point?
For the one delivering it. I realize that it used to be counted as a loss at some point in the past, but that never made any sense.
I think it makes more sense to split the score 50/50, If one side got more than half a point then that means in a tournament or match where the score is tied at the last game (which probably happens often) a stalemate in the last game counts the same as a win without actually winning. That doesn't seem to make much sense either. Like tic tac toe, the method of scoring draws makes sense, no gain for either side. A stalemate in tic tac toe is a tie, so it should be in chess too because neither side gains or loses.
If stalemate were worth 0.6 or 0.8 points, there would be plenty of those instead of dead draws. If I recall correctly, at least two of the games so far had a forced stalemate available.
Which side do you propose get more than half a point?
For the one delivering it. I realize that it used to be counted as a loss at some point in the past, but that never made any sense.