en passant étiquette when opponent doesn't know about the rule

Screech at them until they agree it is a rule

"Brah" is the new "dude".

Yawn...time to roll out the yoga mat again, same as the last three years (no kidding), and curl up with Cody L's 98.6: how to keep ur assets alive in the woods (hint)  ;(  Enjoy ur comfy chairs, beds, and couches, and please listen and watch "Until We Meet Again", Dr. Strangelove version, for furthur intel.

This en passant discussion is about as fruitful as two pawns waiting for Godot.

Carry on.

Ok, so shame on me for thinking this discussion might actually help me with my dilemma but I couldn't help but read it because I ran into a situation today that relates. My buddy and I have a game going and I saw a pawn move that wins a piece... IF and only if he doesn't know the en passant rule. Which I'm guessing he doesn't. So my situation is that I can either make the pawn move AND inform him of his option to capture (I'm rated a few hundred points higher), play an actual good move, or side with the devil on my shoulder and win his knight in dishonorable fashion. Thoughts?

Win the knight! It's not your responsibility to teach him en passant! Go for it!

Thought #1: Winning the Knight will TEACH him the en-passent rule. You'll be doing him a favor, really.

Thought #2: How much do you value the Knight? How much do you value your friend? Think of it as if you were exchanging pieces...

The only advice that can be offered at this time, Ormission, is to search for a suitable microclimate.

And win the game at all costs.

Negative. See post 1815: 

http://www.chess.com/forum/view/off-topic/nobodyreallys-living-room?page=91

letsgohome, you are irrelevantithetical to the gist of this conversation.

If someone doesn't know the en passant rule then they're most likely pretty new to the game. In that case I'd tell them about the rule before I played it so they don't get a nasty surprise and feel like I tricked them, which might put them off playing.

There actually aren't an awful lot of rules to the game and it's better to know the rules before you come across them in a competitive situation.

If it's a friendly game or you're teaching someone, do whatever makes you both happy, but make sure your student learns the rules.

I shared the same sentiment as you did, brah until I had to answer the question from a morality perspective. 

See posts: 528 and 548, I hope they are constructive in your pursuit of self-translucency, brah.

The probity of your character is salient, brah. This is the answer to the entire thread, and I am not being facetious.

The answer has been achieved, then, brah, no need for furthur insights. Your observations are indeed very salivent.

Not entirely brah, the hierarchy of learning is knowledge, comprehension, implementation, analysis/evalution and synthesis. Therefore, we, collectively, are only incipient in the development of a sophisticated answer. Now we must delve deeper in attaining the true prespicacity of this answer.

Who is ready for this journey of enlightenment? 

Your psychological  game-playing is rudimentary and samsaric at best, brah.

Your premise is orthogonal, and is not even as hip as a Huey Lewis  song.

Yes, I can see from your picture that you are quite exuberant.

Spoiler alert: ad hominem attack.

I can see from ur avatar, letsgohome, that u are quite generic.

Brahs, this $h!t is starting to be funny to me.  I have no more respect for myself.  Hahahaa

Actually the majority of the populous on this site that comment frequently have an avator or a picture, thus making one who has an avatar( incidentally like yourself) trite, banal or generic( your observation, not mine. I believe everyone's choice should be accepted, irrespective to having an avatar or not. For it is just  personal preference, and not right or wrong, just indifferent). Therefore, the one's who do not have the avator are those that did not assimulate to the trend, which like all trends become trite after time. For to be generic is to go with the majority and since one can surmise that the majority that comment on the forums have avators, one can logically conclude that having an avator is generic.

Disclaimer: Those who have avators are not banal, trite or generic and evidently the one's who do not have avators are not as well. I was just showing how flawed his comment was through simple logic.

Be true to yourself and altruistic then no man can judge you, brah.