Engine says mate is a blunder?

So I was playing out a game against the computer, using the practice mode, after my opponent resigned and this came up.  Im black, and made the last move, but the engine says it was a blunder. How is mate a blunder?

Mate isn't a blunder.

Why do you ask silly questions like this?

Weird, but well played in your Scandi game

There has been a bug so it's being checked 👍

if there was an option to downvote posts then you would be downvoted to death.

I answered a question and asked a question. I thought it was helpful and silly at the same time.

What have you done lately?

Not surprising tbh. I just made a post about how the engine said moves in the endgame were mistakes when they were perfectly just as good as what the engine said the best move was.

First of all: I also found this message very bad and offending. Second: It is a new, but known "Problem": https://www.chess.com/forum/view/game-analysis/great-analysis-by-chess-com-engine

https://www.chess.com/forum/view/general/checkmate-blunder-1

https://www.chess.com/forum/view/general/checkmate-results-in-a-blunder

it´s a bug!

Yes? I always found, that if the engine says "blunder" within a game (and gives the explanation via the play line) I could follow along. Here, there is no continuation and it´s clear to everybody that a move that leads to checkmate can´t be a blunder. Can you give us some examples of other weird decisions of the engine?

Engine evaluation here is inaccurate quite often and have seen it in mine and others games but wow have never seen calling mate a blunder. Only thing I can think of according to the engines programing Qg7 mate was the most correct move, not my reasoning mate is mate and they need to fix this stuff.

Same here.

does it only happens when one playes against bots?

Why are you offended?

You knew mate wasn't a blunder, but asked the question anyway. You said it was clear post #10

And my message was "very bad"?

The game is over, how is this a problem for you?

You'll find more serious issues than this to talk about when dealing with post game move categories like mistake/best/and blunder.

Given the incredible complexity of chess, it's amazing that these AIs work as well as they do.  A few bugs are bound to crop up.  It will only get better with time.

1) Chessplayers like to review pretty much anything about their games after they are over, so some would see an attempt to stifle post mortems as a bit intolerant.

2) The statement was more a question as to why the computer analysis would be so off, with the implied (and serious) follow-up being just how trustworthy the site's other engine analysis can be.

Personally I feel that anything that has people doubting the validity of the site's analysis is just further cause for not taking a high analysis level and posting it as proving (absotively and posilutely - deliberate word merging) that somebody violated fair play rules.

Its mate.  Who cares what its labeled.

They say when you find a good move, look for a better one. In this case you had a better move. At least according to the computer. 

@perpetuallyPinned "Why do you ask silly questions like this?" is not "just asking a question" for me.

Well, no offense was intended. I didn't consider it very serious, since you already knew the answer. But obviously you are serious about it.

I'll kindly not say another word.