Resignation Etiquette???

Practically everyone.

people who don't resign in a lost position are usually:

1) trying to be stubborn and annoy you, 

2) idiots or beginners who don't know any better,

3) actually think they have a chance in the position,

4) think you are a bad player and won't know how to mop up the game allowing them to save a draw or win. 

fianchetto, you are the perfect example of making assumptions that you simply don't know are true. I don't do that. I don't assume my opponent falls into any of those four categories. Chess players think they can read minds -- I can't, but I'm aware that I can't. I think this kind of thinking is where any prejudice comes from.

That is one annoying thing in analysis when a player is showing his game and says "my opponent underestimated this move" or "my opponent was too afraid to try this sharp continuation and so he played _____"

That really bugs me, and I think can even lead to OTB analysis errors.  It doesn't matter what you opponent saw or didn't see or think, there's no way you can know that anyway.

"It doesn't matter what you opponent saw or didn't see or think, there's no way you can know that anyway."

Yes, thanks for reminding me lol. That's another assumption people make. Recently someone said I fell into a trap, which I thought was in bad taste because he can't totally know why I allowed the move. As it turns out, I saw the "trap" I was falling into before I went into it, but let it happen because I simply didn't think it worked

By the way, for someone (me) who apparently doesn't know anything about etiquette, ironically I do consider that associated with etiquette, as far as post-mortem's go. You shouldn't judge your opponent.

Elubus, I presume that includes me because you have made the same aspersions against me before.

When, I say it would be good for the player in many situations not to play out a completely lost game--this is NOT a complaint!! This is NOT saying  I am upset at a player who plays out a completely lost game. I have never in my life told a player to resign.

Because I think, that in most cases it is better to resign--does not mean i am '"complaining" that people do not resign when they should. You use of the blanket assertation that people are "complaining" when, in fact, they are giving advice is part of your habit of assigning bad motives. 

If, I say that , in general and in most cases, it is not a good idea for someone to move a pawn twice in an opening unless it is attacked or is part of a capture--my statement is not a "complaint" against people who do this. People do this quite often and I think it is not productive for their chess but certainly, I am not making a complaint!

You are making the assumption that people who give reasons to not play a game out to check mate are "complaining" when very often they are just giving chess advise that this is not good for your chess.

You may not like the chess advice but do not make assumptions that they have bad motives and are also "complaining".  

...Ok, explain to me then the people who conjure all sorts of profanities to describe a person who does not resign

Anyway, my general point is that you don't know what intentions your opponent has -- for all you know the opponent playing on might respect you more than you respect him.

I always know my opponent's intentions:  the big bully is tryin' to whip me.

Here's another cool baseball quote--I think it was Lou Brock:

"Show me a guy who is afraid of looking bad, and I'll show you a guy who can be beaten."

Elubus you stated "practically everyone" -Do you see practically  everyone on this forum who conjure all sorts of profanities to describe a person who does not resign???  Come on, back up your statement "Practically everyone". I know you have assigned such motives to me in the past and my history shows I have never asked a player to resign and have not complained to any player to resign.

It is bad for someone's chess progress not to learn when to resign but certainly if they want to do play to checkmate , I am not going to "complain"

I once played someone in a live 15/10 chess game who was completly loss after less then 5 minutes. Not only did he not resigned, and dragged the game as long as he possibly could, he offered draws, and everytime I declined, he would offer again. Not only did he made me lose about 10-15 minutes of my life, but sadly I had no ressource to prevent him of doing that again..

Come on srochoncoutu, you're just trying to make me look bad -- I know you've got a profanity just dying to be spat out.

Yes, that happens way too often and is an example of bad sportsmanship.

Sometimes people forgot that the game is just over when the king is checkmate or when it's draw(stalemate, just two kings on the board, and when the same position came 3 times)

I don't necessarily agree or disagree here, but I believe this is indeed evidence that you do have a problem with those who don't resign, which you claim you don't have.

Repeated draw offers are bad etiquette and it has nothing to do with resigning.

True. I do believe that repeated draw offers are bad etiquette. Although even there I can play the devil's advocate and say that offering a draw every move benefits your opponent because it increases his options lol.

Elubus, you are making assumptions of bad motives again.

Cannot you discuss on the merits without assigning bad motives?

Most strong masters will advise a client not to play out a completely lost game--why?--because it is bad for the client to learn such habits which are detrimental to their chess improvement.

Talk about first-world issues.  To people complaining about opponents resigning, do you do this in otb games? 

I seem to be the only one reading and reacting to your posts in this thread. Glad I took my chill pill when the day began.  

I conjecture we both dislike primadonnas.  Just like Lou Brock, apparently. Unfortunately, I'm clueless on baseball.

His point was that when you're just lost you tend to play trappy, hope chess, playing for swindles.