Evidently I violated the Good Sportsmanship policy for punishing those who refuse to resign.

And you are seriously wondering if what you are doing does or does not violate the Good Sportsmanship policy?

No, I'm not wondering that anymore. Clearly, it does not. I'm sure I have been reported dozens of times from this thread and Chess.com hasn't done anything.

re: "You said punishing people is no way to go through life. That is what I was addressing. That is all I was addressing. Any teacher, parent or police officer can tell you the importance of punishment."

punishment only teaches avoidance. It's been well established for decades. Which apparently it has. from the comment.

He's not doing anything wrong. You can make whatever legal moves you want, just as the opponent can use all of his time.

Have you worked out how you were violating the policy?

That's all I'm trying to teach them. Avoid doing that.

Pretty sure, ya. At that time, I had been resigning fast when receiving phone calls (like just a few moves into the game). And someone pointed out they don't want you doing that. When I stopped doing that, I never got any more warnings.

I would like chess.com to take the same stance on Israel as it did on Russia.

War is not good.

If people across the world ignored the religious tripe they had been fed by their leaders there would be no reason to ban anyone.

Interesting, I didn't know resigning was a problem. I wonder why they sent you a message suggesting you resign or play on.

#NeverResign Gang Alert!

Why would black resign? That's gonna be an easy stalemate. He's got a bishop, he can't fight off a rook and some pawns???

Never Resign Gang Here,

What usually happens here is the rook escapes to a dark square (assuming a light square bishop, like in that position), supporting a pawn promotion. Then the opponent gets a queen, and uses it, along with the rook, to pry apart your king and bishop, and take the bishop. Then it's just a matter of lone king vs king, queen, rook, and 2 pawns, and playing the hope game.

I think sometimes people don't lose their hopes even if there is a hopeless situation.

You are absolutely not #NeverResign Gang, you are what I like to call a rational thinker. #NeverResign Gang see only one thing here: stalemate. They are sure their opponent will stalemate. They watched all of their games and found one or more stalemates and so they know that is what is going to happen here.

^Don't let these k@rens brainwash you 222, you are doing nothing wrong. Promote to bishops of the same color if you can lol (as long as you have at least 1 bishop of the opposite color otherwise that's insufficient MM...etc).

Realistically, no. How is one lone bishop going to fight off three pawns (that are all protected by the king) and a rook? White is one move away from promoting a second pawn to queen and there's sweet sod all black can do about it.

Stalemate is an option, but that's a long-odd and I doubt I'd play it were I black in this identical position unless I was playing a very, very new player who'd rather get cocky than close off a game.

Seeing as you moved the rook away instead of taking the bishop, your opponenet (assuming it was you playing) probably resigned cos he figured he's lost and would much rather go to another game than piss about waiting for you to decide to mate him.

White is one move away from promoting that pawn to a horse.

I was capturing a queen. He chose to promote his pawn, presumably to save the bishop.

I think we both know that in most games in chess, most people most of the time promote to queen. There were no tactical reasons to promote to a knight other than to taunt the opponent and wind them up. You have this odd idea of trying to force your opponents to resign. Whilst it's technically within the rule-book, it's a very unorthodox way of playing the game.

If you were indeed capturing a queen, it just strengthens the reason he has resigned all the more. Your opponent has just lost his only major defensive AND offensive piece. It's odd he chose to play promotion in this situation, but he was probably holding out a vain hope that you might blunder in a rush or something. If it were me, I would figure you would hold the rook fast and push the pawns to promotion. No matter which way you look at it, black is in a dire situation.

I don't understand this thread frankly. In one breath you're telling people to hit the resign buton (on pain of drawn out games,) but in another you're making a mockery of people for doing exactly that.