You've been proven wrong X_Box_Head, too bad you cannot just admit when you are wrong. Instead you type an overly dramatic and ridiculous retort completely avoiding the issue. Have you ever thought of seeking therapy?
I have not been proven wrong on this thread.
I honestly do not know were you come up with this statement.
Then you must be blind.
I love it when my opponents do this. It means I have beaten them and they are really upset.
Gerry - I like your idea but in reality, they are not upset at all, they just dump you like a bad girlfriend and never look back. They don't care, they no conscience, they are clocksucking maggots who are wasting your valuable time.
Ok - lets say you phone me, and we both agree to a conversation.
Then at some point you put me on hold without telling me the conversation is over, and you walk away leaving me hanging.
By your logic you have not wasted my time because I agreed to the original conversation.
What you don't seem to grasp is that in Blitz chess, much like a phone conversation, the time spent is only valid when both parties are still engaged.
The minute one party is no longer participating it is over. It is customary also to let the other party know that the conversation, or the game, is over by either saying goodbye or resigning.
If this is not done, the person on the other end of the phone (or game) is left hanging, thus wasting time, doing nothing, thinking the activity is still active.
This type of behaviour considered rude, bad manners, poor sportsmanship, and shows a lack of ethics or integrity.
Is that clear enough for you X_BoX_Head?
I hope so because I don't think I can dumb it down any more for you.
The problem you have is you are not factoring in time!
Your metaphor is an incorrect comparision because you are leaving out important parts!
When you play a 5 min game you agree upon a game + you agree upon a set time limit.
In your metaphor if I was to do the same comparision.
You would agree to have a conversation + tell them up front they have 5 min to state there case.
In 5 mins you are going to hang up the phone weather they talk to you or not.
Telling a person up front that they have 5 mins to say something is not rude.
It is how things are done in the business world.
Some people do not have all day to talk to 1 person.
They have a time frame. If you do not fit in what you have to do in the allowed time frame.
Than it is your own fault.
They have every right to hung up on you.
Especially if you agreed to the time frame!
If I tell a friend of mine I only have 5 mins to talk.
Than 2 mins in the conversation they put me on hold.
I wait 3 more mins on hold.
Than I hang up the phone.
I gave them 5 total mins.
They used up 5 mins.
Now if they didn't get a chance to tell me what they had to say who fault is it?
I waited my 5 mins which I said I would do.
They put me on hold?
It is there fault that they didn't tell me what they had to say in the time I gave them.
I am not rude.
I am not impolite.
I told them from the very begin I only had a certain amount of time.
Than I was going to have to go.
Do I have to agree with the way they used up there 5 mins?
Certainly not! I do not have to agree with what they did.
However, Am I upset?
No, I am not upset because they have the right to use there time as they wish.
If I was in there shoes I would of used my time in a more productive way.
However, they chose to squander there time by having me on hold.
Was my time wasted being on hold?
No, it was not why?
because I promised them 5 mins and I followed through with my promise!
I kept my word and waited the full 5 mins.
Than I hung up the phone.
In conclusion this metaphor is an accurate example which proves I am right.
While you may not agree with the way your "opponent uses his time".
You do have to keep your promise and honor your end of the bargin.
Otherwise you are no different than your opponent.
The only way for your opponent to waste your time is if you choice to allow him to exceed the allowed time.
Alright. In this analogy, the five minutes is for both players. In a chess game, both players are given five minutes.
Slimcheffy's analogy between a chess game and phone call was legitimate and in fact brilliant, but,
You, X_PLAYER_J_X, took it way too far and now your argument is invalid.
Tell me, X_RETARD_J_X, what is your motive in arguing a lost cause?
You know that you have been outspoken by me, Slimcheffy, and the others on our side.
So why do you continue to use invalid evidence and fight against us when our case is clearly more reasonable and correct than yours?
Why do you chose to be the moron who never gives up an argument, the moron who always joins the losing side, the moron who argues his losing side even after it has been explicitly portrayed that his argument is poor?
I suggest you walk a bit down the path of reform.
Ok, took me half a day, but I finally get it: "clock-suckers." Not too bad!
chess.com are perfectly well aware of the problem, they don't need to be "made aware" of it. People who just let their clock tick to the end of the game usually get a "may have violated our fair play policy" warning and, as far as I am aware, the server tends to pair people like this against each other more often so those who do it regularly will get a black mark against their name and play others who do the same.
I rarely meet anyone who disconnects and lets their clock tick because I don't do it myself so I'm not paired with those who do it regularly.
This is probably the most ridiculous notion I have heard yet, the server pairs clocksuckers with other clocksuckers so they will get a black mark against their name??? bahahahahahahahaaaaaaa!! Welcome to Fantasy Island!! The plane!! the plane!!!
Well, it is straight from a chess.com member of staff and like I say, I don't meet many who run their clock down. Those that do meet a lot probably do so because they themselves do it too.
Happens so seldom, it's not worth discussing.
you guys are over complicating this forum, its simple, its not about ratings, it's about people who abandon live blitz games when down in position or material. Why can't they be decent and resign? That's all I ask.
The only person making this complicated in this forum is you.
Why can't you understand being polite has no connection to being down material?
What on earth will you do when you start facing players who will do positional exchange sacrifices against you?
or
Attacking players who will sacrifice for mating attaks against you?
Technically speaking they are down material from a mathmatical stand point
Do you expect them to resign?
You allow players in a 5 min blitz game to use 5 full mins.
Than you turn right back around and pick and chose who is allowed to use the full 5 mins you agreed too!
You do these things based on assumptions because you can not physically see your opponent!
How rude are you to set forth prejudgements on people with out having any evidence of what the h*ll they are doing?
I hate to break it to you buddy.
However, if a lighting storm comes around your house or nieghborhood and your lights go out.
Guess what?
Chess.com will send your opponent a message saying you abandoned the game with this little tagg line:
"slimcheffy may have violated our fair policy and his account may be restricted"
I'll read this after you fix your spelling errors, b*tch.