Blocking really rude players

You resort to labelling me with names, try and question my intellect, and I am the troll.  So just because you are unable to find a way to make me come unstuck means I am a troll/flamer/whatever!??  lol 

I'm just trying to understand Suggo's view here. A few posts above Suggo said I mis-understood his view, so now I'm asking a yes/no question to clarify that view. Specifically, I'm wondering...

1) Does Suggo believe that "refusing to resign in lost positions" is not rude, or

2) Does Suggo believe that in general, "anything within the rules" is not rude.

In other words, is he saying that this specific behaviour is not rude, or is he saying that anything within the rules cannot be rude?

See where I'm coming from? There's a clear difference between the two views, and I'm trying to clarify where Suggo stands. Why am I asking this, because we might not be disagreeing so much after all. The worst thing is arguing about something, then realizing that everyone actually agrees and the argument was about nothing.

A whole paragraph as an aswer is qualifing my answer and IMO less able to be twisted than a yes/no answer.

As far as how telling it is, well I have explained this previously in the other thread, maybe you could go back and reread that post. 

But if you really want a yes/no answer I'll give you one:

Clarified question:  Are you saying that for you, anything within the rules of chess cannot be considered rude? 

Yes/no answer:  Yes.

I've made various posts that you've chosen to ignore, presumably because you couldn't answer the point. e.g. my example given with football.

I haven't 'resorted' to labelling you, I have simply labelled you.

The fact remains that sportsmanship is a concept apparently beyond you, and I pity you for it.

 This indicates there is really nothing more to be said, you simply don't get it, and I or no one else will change your mind, it is simply a deluded and quite laughable standpoint.

Its like if you lacked a sense of humor, eveyone would be laughing and you would have no idea why, you simply don't have a 'sense of sportsmanship' as it were.

Does Suggo believe that "refusing to resign in lost positions" is not rude

I believe that 'refusing to resign in lost positions" is rude...because the obly truely lost positon is once you have been checkmated!  And once checkmated it would be rude to play on.

Does Suggo believe that in general, "anything within the rules" is not rude

As far as any games or sports goes, anything within the rules is not what I would consider rude.  Outside of this area it will depend on the scope and situation.

I actually missed this post, so for that I apologise, I did not ignore it.

Why do they have to kick it out of bounds?  Does the ref not blow time off?

I wonder how many threads one has to hijack and get locked before there are consequences?  I think it's fair to say that it's officially gone from arguing an absurd and indefensible position to out and out trolling.  This isn't even what this thread is about.

I get it just fine.  But this is what I find amazing.  You speak of sportsmanship...and you choose not to respect my pov. 

So you are another who want to impose ideals and behaviours upon others, that seems fairly disrepectful to me as well.  It is pretty funny actually that you say these things. 

I have played senior football and have been in boxing matches along with a lot of other sports, and I have conducted myself in the exact manner I have described, I play to the full extent of the rules..ie, not touching gloves etc...and yet pretty much every opponent I have ever had is happy with my conduct and I have actually had many many compliments for this approach.  It has been very very rare that I get an opponent that does not shake my hand at the end of a game/bout etc. 

But you can deduce what you like from all this, what you think is up to you and is no ski off my nose!

Did you read the earlier posts or just jump in?  Try reading the earlier posts and you will see that it was not I that changed the topic, and once again I am simply defending myself.

I read the whole thread.  I think you knew exactly what you were doing with post #10.

There, was that so difficult? What do you think I'm going to do now, use that against you? lol...a little too defensive there

No, the point of my question is this: We are basically arguing about nothing. This is what it sounds like...

Suggo: this is okay with me

Everyone else: this is not okay with me

Now repeat those two sentences over and over again. The very definition of rudeness differs between Suggo and everyone else, so the whole argument is empty. Let this thread cool.

Just about sums it up, Suker :)

You have actually got this bit right, but I have said this very thing to most of these posters before in an earlier thread.  Unfortunately they would not accept that each person can have a different definition of what rude is.... *shrugs*

This lack of acceptance and then subsequent attempts to impose their idea and meaning of what rude is upon me...this is the only thing that I argue with.  The pressure they attempt to apply to others to follow their ideals and standards.

Please for the love of God stop saying "you choose to impose your beliefs and ideals on me" you clearly have no other criteria for using that statement then "I have nothing else to say" I have said two, three, or maybe four times that you have your opinion and I'm not trying to change it, but I am also entitled to call it like I see it. I find your position laughable as well as many others. 

Like my 'sense of sportsmanship' post started, you just don't get it. I'm not going to listen to a blind man tell me that I'm not seeing something correctly. Does that mean I'm imposing my ideals on the blind man? Seriously get some new material, and I put no stock at all (nor should anyone) in your sports history comments

Just so this is obvious as can be:

Saying "You are Wrong" is not equivalent to imposing ideals on someone

Even this argument is pointless now. This is what that sounds like...

Suggo: You shouldn't do that.

Everyone else: It's within our rights to criticize them.

Suggo: It's within their rights to do what they want.

Everyone else: Alright, but we'll still criticize them.

Suggo: Alright, but they'll still do what they want.

Everyone else: Exactly, but we'll still criticize them.

Repeat that over and over. The conclusion? Nothing.

You're rather good at paring it down to the nuts and bolts, Suker, I like that.

Had you said " I think you are wrong" I would have accepted that and left it

Saying "it is simply a deluded and quite laughable standpoint." is equivalent to trying to impose ideals and standards upon someone!

Back to making up what I am saying again eh Suker.

It is not about everyone else just saying that they don't agree.  It is about them trying to pressure them to conform.  I chime in to make sure people know that they aren't alone and don't have to conform if they don't want to, a pressure release so to speak.  This is also why I don't post once and leave it go, for me there are far too many people on here that want to dictate how everyone else should act and behave.

How so?