Stalling.

Stalling is becoming a huge problem, and chess.com should perma ban those accounts that do it.

Why should those of us trying to play have to tolerate losers who let clock run out instead of resign?  

It is called Time Chess for a reason. Also, in addition, maybe you should play a standard game if time chess isn't for you.

You're being ignorant. A person losing their queen, then not making a move for 3 minutes until they time out isn't playing chess at all; they're griefing.

#3. I'm not being ignorant at all. I'm just speaking the bloody truth fyi.

There is a very big difference between someone still playing, and someone who is stalling.
I'm fine with people using all their time, i'm not ok with intentional stalling after they lose their queen or they know they are mated in 1-2 moves.

I only stall if my opponent uses an opening trap or I obviously mouse slip and they don’t accept a draw

There are two types of fault in sports.

1°) Factual faults, can be easily named, numbered, proved, etc.

2°) Other faults, harder to prove, etc.

Stalling clearly belongs to the second type of fault.

Ask the player why they are doing that, they'll reply (possibly) that they are thinking. And well, you can't "prove" there is any other reason, that's a problem.

And so, here the reason why sports need referees/arbiters and/or jury, so they can judge a situation where all is not physically provable.

To a player saying "Hey, I'm using my time as I want", a referee can reply "It's only obvious what you are doing is ill minded". And if the player appeals upon the referee's decision to sanction them, a jury can easily confirm the first judgement.

But... Here we are playing within an online chess website.

Hence, no referee, even less a jury.

And well, if you implement some automated feature making you lose because you calculate what you'll be doing next after sacrificing your Queen, that will generate undeserved automatic wins/losses, for it's hard to explain to a machine what exactly stalling means.

And that's the problem: would you trade a problem for an other problem that proves worse?

Of course not.

And that's why, most of the time, bad rules are kept alive, because one can't imagine a change that would not be worse.

Besides, in real life chess events withe referees and all, if a players acts silly with the clock after losing obviously the game, referees tend to say nothing because:

1°) You never know if the winning player is not going to blunder like big bad unexplainable blunder.

2°) Possible lawsuits (you said in your rules what's the time you have got on the clock, then step back on it during a game....)

Just open a lichess tab and play bullet while you wait

If someone walks up to me with a knife out, and they say they are going to butter some toast, i'm not going to take their word when there is no toast or a toaster anywhere in the area.
When someone loses a queen, then stalls for their entire remaining time refusing to move until timing out (3 minutes in a 5 minute game). They aren't thinking, there is no 'toast' in that situation.
When someone is one - two moves from checkmate, and they waste 4 minutes of a 5 minute game and ultimately make no move, there is no toast.
There's providing benefit of the doubt, then there is letting people stab others because they claimed they were going to butter toast.
There are very obvious cases where stalling is occurring. I'm not talking about the cases where they spend 2 minutes thinking, then move a piece and they're still in the game.

Just open the superb support bot, connect to a staff member and suggest your plan on how to eliminate stalling users brutally once and for all

That completely misses the point, and is straw manning the real issue.
Nobody is discussing people who are using their time genuinely. That's not what's the issue.

Hi

https://support.chess.com/en/articles/8562517-how-do-i-report-someone

Best to report the members don't need to be on here with rheee topics