lol, did you even read what I wrote?

1. Like I said, your philosophy ("move on, respect their decision, etc.") is great. I am not questioning that (read that sentence a few times until it sinks in). But it looks like you can't tolerate people who don't share your philosophy.

2. Yes, it's well within their rights to deliberately wait out a game 1 move from checkmate when there's only 1 legal move to consider. I agree (no sarcasm, seriously). But isn't it also within people's rights to talk about this behaviour and find ways to discourage it? I don't see any rules been broken by either party, so why do you single out one side to criticize?

Be more specific? What about post #72? He's not breaking the rules by what he said. He was completely within his rights.

"Imposing" eh? lol. Then aren't you also imposing your philosophy on others? Nobody is enforcing anything here.

Both sides are doing this Suggo -- but only one side is being hypocritical in the process.

Semantics.  By that logic, there are some players out there who are rude and we are simply resisting.

Here, I'll rephrase the basic message in a gentler tone:

"What you are doing is wasting both your time and my time, and it achieves nothing productive. So don't do it."

This is a perfectly reasonably idea. Spreading this around in a forum is not called imposing. Let me ask you this first: do you agree that this behaviour is rude? If I'm black, playing against you in the position below, and instead of finishing the game, I walk away from the computer screen to let my time run out -- would that be considered rude in your book? This is an etiquette-based question, so please leave the "it's within their rights/rules" stuff out. And please, just a yes or no answer.

Holy God this thread got goofy.

Gentlemen, I'm sure you're all better than this trite level of argumentation. Don't let it suck you in further!

/for what it's worth - I'm with Suggo: nothing is stupider than someone posting a thread on the net whining like a baby because of online "rudeness"
//dammit, I've been snagged!

if only more people had the cojones to resign a lost position instead of letting the time run down like a child,then this world would be a better place!!

lol, you avoided the question. Leave out issues of rights/rules. My question is simple: do you think this behaviour is rude? I'm asking you this because it'll make the discussion so much simpler if I know where you stand on this. It's a very simple question. Here, I'll even make it into a multiple choice for you. Choose one of the answers below:

A) Yes, I consider it rude.

B) No, it is not rude by my book.

A or B? Trust me, I'm not judging you on this. This is just to clarify the discussion.

I agree -- and neither does yours.  That was the point.

Looking through this, I'm seeing a lot of rationalization and skirting of the actual core issue at hand (you still haven't directly answered SuckerPuncher333's question, for example).  I think that's very telling.

As for the folks here telling others what they should and shouldn't do, no-one compelled you or anyone else to click on this thread.  The discussion didn't show up in your inbox like the invites to your group do in mine.  I think this also says a lot about who's pushing their ideals here and who's simply publishing them.

I'm not sure why you keep avoiding my question, but that's okay. Just remember what you said above.

Call it "imposing" if you want, but it's still within the rules/rights. To quote your own words: "It's within their rights/rules, so I have no problem with it whatsoever." See the contradiction? lol

Your reaction to "rude people": they are within the rules/rights, so I'm okay with it.

Your reaction to "sensitive people": they are within the rules/rights, but that's not enough. I'm not okay with it.

Ok people.I've read and have been told that this forum is becoming a bit out of hand.So please cool it.Everyone has his own opinion,and we should respect each other's opinion.So please cool it down with the insults or I may have to lock down the forum,so that a moderator wouldn't have to intervene.I'm not saying not to post your view,but please do so in a respectful manner. Thank you for your consideration and obedience. 

An interesting question since Suckerpuncher likes questions.

Which is greater? -

a) the total amount of time you've spent arguing in this thread

b) the total amount of time you have been/will be inconvenienced by "bad losers"

~~~~~~~~~~~~

It's a good point. I choose a), but I'm not the one who's bothered by "bad losers." I didn't start this thread. I'm just confused by people (like Suggo) who seems perfectly capable of tolerating "bad losers," yet unable to tolerate "complainers" (especially when nobody is forcing him to read these complaints).

Well, I can't speak for him, but here's my best guess.

What is contemptable about complainers is that it's a very easy choice to not be bothered by these things. Okay, so some jerk out there is sooo frustrated with your better play that he decides to let the game time out due to spite. Alright.

Like a chess game with two sides to the position: who is winning here?

Whomever is letting the frustration get to them more is on the losing side, because they've let the other guy win. Now, it's just as easy to see that if the person has to be so petulant and petty as to spite you with a timeout, you can smile smugly knowing that you've upset this person so much that the only out their puerile mind can offer is the idea that by "costing" you all of like 10 minutes they're somehow going to transfer some of that frustration over to you.

After 3 minutes has passed (ie by the time you notice that they intend to do this - either a) they're actually thinking and intend to play again and you'll have a 3 minute lead and were already winning before hand - in which case, get up! Stretch! Go grab a new glass of water or put some tea on! or b) they're going to time out - in which case, get up! Stretch! Go grab a new glass of water or put some tea on!) and celebrate the fact that you're stressless and happy - look at your winning position and revel in the fact that you've gotten to this person so exquisitely as they must be infuriated out there. Remember - they have to watch the game time out too - so - for which of the two of you is it more excrutiating?

The people who complain about these things haven't learned a simple lesson in life - oftentimes YOU are the one in control of how stressed you are in a given situation. Are you in a long lineup at the bank and you need to be somewhere? Well, panicing in the line the whole time won't help - sometimes you just have to trust it will all work out.

So "whinging" is a sign of psychological weakness in many instances. Whining says "This has power over me"; and in such an extremely trite case as 10 minutes in a clock on a chess game - when your life circumstances must be such that you have the leisure time to play chess in a heated building on a computer no less - it's a pretty silly thing to want to discuss with others.

Look, sure human beings commiserate, but when the answer to the question is as simple as "Don't let it bother you", it's hard to feel any sympathy.

Complainers in this respect need help irrespective of the actual argument. They need to be told exactly what Suggo said - suck it up, buttercup.

Sure you can do it in more polite ways - which is what I'm attempting now - but the jist of Suggo's argument stands, and it will stand for complaining threads long after this one has passed.

In his words;

So you have only have three choices then

-Accept it as part of the game and continue on

-Wallow and whine like you are now which really just proves you to be a sook.

-Don't play!

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

I don't consider Wallow and whine to be an option. THAT is the issue - and all such instances where that behavior can be recognised should be cajoled and stomped out. It's "icky" to have one person complaining - but God forbid the whole community comes together and has a whinefest about not resigning, or sandbagging, or not saying "hello" of all things, or ANY OF THE POSSIBLE ABUSES ON THE INTERNET.

THERE WILL ALWAYS BE ABUSABLE ASPECTS.

And before TheGrobe launches in (by the way, Grobe, we need to go for a pint and a game soon again) with his programmers instincts to solve all of them, hahaha, I want to say that I find it ugly to think that some upper-middle class computer chess playing kid somewhere out there is better off having these TEDIOUS INCONVENIENCES SOLVED FOR HIM WHEN HE WOULD IN FACT BE MUCH BETTER OFF LEARNING TO DEAL WITH TEDIOUS INCONVENIENCES.

I hope that explains it.

/you've already won the chess game
//don't choose to lose the psychological one - then YOU get to be a bad loser too

For the life of me I cant decide whats worse: people who whine and complain or those who whine  and complain about their whining and complaining ?!

Excellently stated Rael. Your message is spot on: don't let yourself get frustrated by rude players who deliberately try to annoy you.

But why not extend that a bit: don't let yourself get frustrated by anyone, rude players or "complainers." Note that this is different from saying: "please sympathize with them." I am saying: "don't get upset because someone is raising complaints in a thread that nobody forced you to read." Suggo feels that one particular group of people are being victimized by another group, and he's voicing his concerns on their behalf:

lol yeah...this is the same guy who said "don't let anyone bother or frustrate you"...

There have been a few instances in this thread so far where people leap on what they think are logical inconsitencies when there haven't been any.

TheGrobe challenged Suggo on hypocrasy when he framed the situation as both sides arguing about what people should do, etc - he's wrong - pointing out a list of options isn't telling people what they should do, it's merely making a list of their options.

Another that I saw as a possible response to my time question was that I'm now spending time on the thread - but I never implied that spending time on the thread in itself was wrong, it only dwarfs the amount of time causing the intial problem.

Now Reb - you're not actually catching me out because I'm not complaining - neither is Suggo. We're making reasonable points, mixed with some insults, to correct behaviour we thing hurts the original poster. We're trying to help, actually - none of what I've said involves a whine or a complaint; I invite you to try and point one of them out.

Attempts to find paradoxical circumlocutions in a persons argument can often be winning - like a chess tactic - IF they're sound. Like a chess tactic they're witty and quick and try to win with the merest amount of effort (a single sentence?).

In this case, it simply doesn't fly. If you want to win, you have to look deeper into the position.

Once again, I don't feel like fighting his battles for him, but honestly - it doesn't look to me like he's either upset or frustrated.

There are only two people in all of this we can know for certain were actually frustrated - the initial "bad loser" who let the game time out, and the OP for making the post.

I often wonder why chess players aren't better at making arguments - all of the same rules apply - slowly improving your position, maintaining the tension until your opponent can't take it - then your opponent overextends his position and your strike.

In fact, that gives me a great idea for a blog. Nice.