Translation: I hate people that don't give takebacks on move input errors.

That's all you had to say.

There is a rule that once a legal move is completed it can't be undone. That pretty much covers all the cases yours included.

There is no technical error that can't be taken care of on your side:

• if your mouse malfunctions - replace it
• if you are clumsy - slow down
• if you've messed up anyway - resign

This is the most decent way to deal with "mouseslip" problem instead of burdening your opponent with it.

Takebacks reduce chess game to a joke, please let's not go down that path.

I liken the issue of takeback requests due to clear technical error to a real-life game where one person had a hand tremor or accidentally bumped a piece with his hand while turning to talk to someone behind him, or perhaps when he is was clearly adjusting a piece that there is no reason whatsoever to think that he would be be considering moving, or perhaps accidentally tipped over his king (usually a sign of resignation) when he clearly did not mean to resign.

If two people were playing a friendly game and a person like the one above lost the game because the other person was ultra-strict about touch rules, both the losing player and other reasonable people seeing or hearing about the game later would very likely think the hard-core stickler for the rules was being irrational and rude, and would similarly consider ensuing arguments from said person that "there is no such thing as a 'legitimate' take back request" to be quite illogical and uncouth indeed.

Barring some extreme circumstances that I would have difficulty imagining IRL, saying that such a takeback in such circumstances would "reduce the chess game to a joke" (especially if the losing player had invested any significant amount of time into the game) would similarly be seen as extremely rigid and illogical by most reasonable people.

I would think that not being fair and understanding about the circumstances in a case like the hypothetical one above would clearly reduce the stature of chess players in most people eyes as well as anyone falling victim to the extreme interpretation of the rules while playing that player at some later date. Perhaps toxic would be too harsh a term for many, but certainly such a person is not someone who most people would want to be around IRL, I know I sure wouldn't.

Just because someone can't or won't be widely held to account for uncouth actions while they are online is no reason why common sense and decency should not be expected, actions do not somehow become effect-less simply because they are not done face-to-face with others around to hold people to account...

With that said, I think I've made my case here and will not be following this thread further. I hope chess.com will consider adding a takeback request button to the live chess feature in the future, as it would compensate for technical errors (often unforeseeable, computers/computer mice/the internet are far from errorless devices) that might otherwise ruin otherwise well-fought games.

Everybody is different, and I can see the sense in Tao999's comments, though I also agree uri65. However, one thing I heard from a friend of mine who is an IM is that during a GM game one player slipped and touched a piece. His opponent let it pass but later on in the game the guy who accidently touched his piece was winning. Instead of taking the victory, he offered the other guy a draw, even though a win would have pushed him up in his chess career. Nice story!

I can only admire with your brave stand on ethics, Tao 999.
What ethical decision was needed to represent yourself with a religous symbol ?

By the by: 'Rules' -by definition- are only concerned with tecnical errors. All errors being 'technical'.
(Two can play at pedantry) 

1. If you expect everyone to abide by your sense of ethics, you don't deserve the respect you demand.

2. I don't allow take-backs OTB either (nor do I ask for them). The irony is I've yet to see someone complain about it face-to-face as much as you have here. As the saying goes: "The door swings both ways."

In an unrated game against someone much lower rated, takebacks should be okay. Otherwise they just lose too quickly.

When playing, I agree 100% with pfren!

But it would be nice to have a takeback feature to help with live analysis.

I'd say depends on the circumstances and why you are playing. In a friendly game at the local pub, where you both were having fun but your opponent makes a stupid blunder, the loss is acknowledged and I allow the takeback, and we see where the game would have gone without the blunder. It allows us to keep playing without starting over. What's the harm in that?

"loss is acknowledged" is a key phrase here. If I understand correctly your opponent actually resigns and you start a new game from position just before his blunder.

Exactly correct. It punishes the "takeback", but we were both interested in the game and want to see where it might have gone without the blunder.

Will you give a seven-year old like me takebacks?

In online chess (as opposed to OTB chess, not what chess.com means), the takeback button looks exactly like the resign button.

I posted about friendly OTB games. To be clear, I agree with some of the other posters there is no reason for "takebacks" in any rated game, and I don't see how it makes any sense in an online environment.