Plus, you cannot make everybody happy in the "when to resign" argument anyway.
I had a game against an equal player where I dropped a pawn and my pawn structure was horrendous. When I resigned he expressed displeasure, probably because he wanted to enjoy putting a slow gradual squeeze on me.
Although this thread details an extreme example where resigning was certainly in order, each player should resign in their own time based on their analysis of the current position.
Well First off I hardly ever quit, Secondly I was kinda hoping for a stalemate
That is exactly why higher players get upset with lower ranked players. They drag a game on for weeks HOPING for a tie.... I don't like it because I don;t do that... If someone thinks differently, fine but your scorched earth policy is unpolite to the opponent and shows no respect to the other person.
... each player should resign in their own time based on their analysis of the current position.
Words of gold! Except that this case is somewhat different. In this case, Black invokes non-chess reasons for not-resigning: "I never resign", "My Master told me not to", etc. And that really sounds like something religious. And like saying that my religion is better than the "life-is-too-short" religion. No wonder many people feel bothered.
There are lots of posts in this thread, I read only the first 2 or 3 pages; I'm sorry if I repeat what other people already said. I don't like to resign myself and I'm afraid I do it less often than I should 
. And I agree x34xElfekix34x should have resigned, perhaps around move 40...
... But I think the point is "did his opponent behave unsportsmanlike?", and she did in my opinion. To teach a fellow player a lesson about resigning or any other chess manners is OK (we all can learn from each other!) as long as it isn't by means of humiliation.
As chess players, we should be clever enough to keep chess fun. 
Sometimes, a high level player would like to strip down his opponents once in awhile. I just did too, with my friend. (:
LOLOLOLOL HAHAHAHAHA thats ridiculously funny
There are lots of posts in this thread, I read only the first 2 or 3 pages; I'm sorry if I repeat what other people already said. I don't like to resign myself and I'm afraid I do it less often than I should . And I agree x34xElfekix34x should have resigned, perhaps around move 40...
... But I think the point is "did his opponent behave unsportsmanlike?", and he did in my opinion. To teach a fellow player a lesson about resigning or any other chess manners is OK (we all can learn from each other!) as long as it isn't by means of humilliation.
As chess players, we should be clever enough to keep chess fun.
the only "humilliation" (spell check) comes form him posting this in the first place
Learn your lesson. Don't ever let him screw around with you like that again. EVER.
Bottom line is; if ur not obligated to resign a clearly lost game when you should, they are not obligated to kill u quickly. It is give and take issue here u cannot just say they are being unfair when ur waisting there time continuing to play anyway. Take the good with the bad and learn from the game stop worrying about whether they could have done so quicker or not and find out what u did wrong in the first place to get urself in the trouble u did.
lol
You don't have to resign, and they don't have to make an effort to checkmate you with any more efficiency then the rules allow. Simple as that. Stop whining- you could have put yourself out of misery at any time.
This is a lost chance, really. I mean, he's got 8 pieces -- he should have gone for 1 queen, 2 bishops, 2 knights and 2 rooks, and arrange them appropriately...
Agreed
Well My coach(IM David Ross) Tells me to never resign no matter what the position is. I think I will Listen to the International Master Than you guys.
Take a look at this game below played by your coach David Ross himself:
http://www.chessgames.com/perl/chessgame?gid=1179374
As it turns out, he resigned! Don't take his words so literally. Kasparov, Fischer, Karpov, Kramnik, Anand, ... have all resigned many many games, and they are all super-grandmasters, much better than David Ross or any international master.
That kinda' reminded me of a cat playing around with a mortally wounded mouse. If the damn mouse doesn't like it, he oughta' commit suicide, right? No wait, the cat should put the mouse out of its misery.
Though, that game was much more amusing to watch than the eventual death of the poor little mouse.
What a joke!
And your wish has come true. A NM has told you what to do. Is that high even for you?
Well actually I learn From an IM an NM is a Step below, So to answer your question no.
Then how about grandmasters and super-grandmasters? Look at games from Kasparov, Anand, Kramnik, etc. They have all resigned. I assume that hundreds of GMs and super-GMs would be sufficiently qualified to teach a 560 USCF-rated player like you?
Wow 4 queens! I wonder when will that happen to me where I can promote my pawns to a queen.
LOL IT DOESNT HELP IF YOU CRY ABOUT IT
Exactly!!!! WHY ARE YOU EVEN TALKING ABOUT IT?? DO YOU WEAR A DRESS???
LoL.. you really had it coming. A good player would be humble enough to accept his defeat when he has just a King remaining and the opponent promotes a Pawn to Queen and still have 5 more potential Queens. Sorry, but I think you were the er.. "unsportsmanlike" person.
Sweet game.. lol
I guess not resigning is unsportsmanlike.LOL.
yeah, really