being accused of abandoning a game! wtf?

You can lose by abandonment, even when it's not your turn, if the server doesn't see a connection to your client for a sufficient amount of time. I'm not sure exactly why that can happen, when it's not your turn, but that is how it's currently implemented.
Would it not be advisable to replace "the servers", which are clearly faulty? Or at least give the benefit of the doubt to the last person who moved? Think about it: the last person who moved would be the least likely to abandon the game (he just moved, after all). Therefore, if anyone is to abandon, it would be the person who is currently moving, no?

Would it not be advisable to replace "the servers", which are clearly faulty? Or at least give the benefit of the doubt to the last person who moved? Think about it: the last person who moved would be the least likely to abandon the game (he just moved, after all). Therefore, if anyone is to abandon, it would be the person who is currently moving, no?
The servers aren't faulty but disconnects can happen for a lot of reasons. I don't know the rationale behind abandonment when it's not a player's turn, just that it's possible and designed that way
You obviously don't understand what connection issues are. They are client side issues, based on faulty Internet or the like. What most likely happened was you played your move, then disconnected, then he played his move, you did not move for a minute bc of your connection, so the game called it abandoned. It is not the fault of the servers, there is literally nothing they can do to improve your own connection.

With simple algorithms I generate in 5 minutes, I can be better than what chesscom is doing now.
The most basic algorithm: the last one who played should always win. There's no reason to not.

With simple algorithms I generate in 5 minutes, I can be better than what chesscom is doing now.
The most basic algorithm: the last one who played should always win. There's no reason to not.
The site can do that easily enough if that was the design decision.

With simple algorithms I generate in 5 minutes, I can be better than what chesscom is doing now.
The most basic algorithm: the last one who played should always win. There's no reason to not.
The site can do that easily enough if that was the design decision.
With a budget of $1000 they can solve 80% of the problem, I don't understand why they don't take a move!

With a budget of $1000 they can solve 80% of the problem, I don't understand why they don't take a move!
My understanding is the design is any disconnect, regardless of the player on the move, begins the abandonment countdown. That is, it's working as desiged and would require the site to decide on a different design for the developers to fix. It's not a question of money.
I personally agree, any abandonment counter should not impact players not on the move, but it's not my decision to make.