Casuals are Not Beginners

Calling the guy a beginner AGAIN is certainly a roast. What else?

Most casual players are lifelong beginners. Nothing wrong with that. If you don't want to learn to play chess well, no one makes you. You'll remain a beginner no longer how you play. It's not a moral judgement nor a measure of your worth as a human being. It's a measure of your chess skill, or rather your lack of skill.
I started with archery in the 1960s. I'm still a beginner. I've never worked at it.

You can be a lifelong dabbler but a beginner only for a while.

I might have misunderstood. I thought he meant he's not good enough to be called a beginner so he wants to be called a casual player instead. Sorry if I insulted anyone xD

I thought I was being nice by saying beginner.

It seems to me that on Chess.com the dictionary definition of the word 'beginner' is ignored by most. This is from the Oxford dictionary: "beginner - noun, a person just starting to learn a skill or take part in an activity". As such, a better description for someone, such as myself, who is 700 rated (or whatever is deemed to be poor) despite having played for years is 'Low Rated' not 'Beginner'. I'm rubbish at the game, I know I'm rubbish, but I don't really care because I still enjoy playing (probably a lot more than some who are obsessed with their rating). Low Rated suits me fine.

So, you prefer being called rubbish?
Maybe novice? Close to the same dictionary definition as beginner.

Amateur was the term used a century ago, but then even the best players were not technically professionals because they did not make their living from chess.

Earlier in history players were graded by the odds they would receive while playing a master: queen and two pawns?

I think the term beginner is not pejorative and describes a point on a learning continuum. That many casual players are happy not moving forward should be considered acceptable. If they want to improve, they should embrace the reality that they are beginners.

I was a beginner the first seven years that I played this game. That was decades before the internet. When I understood that I could learn about chess strategy and tactics through books, I quickly became better than all my friends.

At no point could I be “low rated” until I played in rated events. By the time I did that, I’d been playing the game almost thirty years. My initial non-provisional OTB rating was mid-1400s. Average club player.

The bunny is terribly disappointed

If you don’t care about your rating, why do you rant about the ratings?

If you do care about your rating, why do you object to the observation that your skill is that of a beginner?

That's a lot of shushing.

https://www.chess.com/forum/view/help-support/low-elo-suspiciousness

And a lot of sussing.

"Me and the boys thought we had it sussed

Valentinos all of us

My dad said we looked ridiculous"

Maybe you were only joking, my dear