If you don’t accept at least one rematch after you win, then you lose.

I didn't create this account for that. And my arguments have nothing to do with rating, nor do I care what my rating is. Obviously I'm not the only person with these sentiments. You can say whatever you'd like, but somewhere inside, you know fear plays a part a decent chunk of the time. My original statement was incorrect about "all." I do contend, however, that adjusting for those who dont want to play again or wish to change time formats, a lot of times, fear plays a role in accepting a rematch, at least for a good amount of people. I have no empirical data, just my opinion.

Yea, ok. Look at your username. So in denial.

If they show no signs of being "butt hurt" then you couldn't know how they'll act. I'd say at least one rematch is respectful if they have been respectful. And as ive stated before: 

1. The rating of the new opponent will be comparable to the old one, and 

2. Due to the astronomical number of variations (and color switch) it would be impossible to know if youre playing the same opponent twice if you didnt know their username. 

If they're not being a holes, assuming you were going to play again anyway, then there is no rational reason to not want to play someone again in the same time format, around the same rating, in a completely different variation, other than what? 

The difference is that my only agenda is to play someone.  I could play this person who asks for a rematch or a could play someone new. Someone new is the tabula rasa .. I have now idea why the already played person wants to play again... revenge?  show off?  who cares.  I don't care if my opponent is a master or a beginner.  I'm pretty used to losing so the idea of "fear" is something in your own mind.  There seems to be a bit of transference going on, but who knows?

I would absolutely agree that fear can and does enter into the equation at times. Some are fearful of attempting to play another person even with the anonymity of the internet. Perhaps due to the rampant “uncivilness” that anonymity affords. The forum is well stocked with examples of both. I can only assume that some individuals momentarily overcome their fear to play, find that they’ve actually won, and then are faced with a quick rematch request. Some will beat a hasty retreat due to that fear and wish to bask in the win for a time before venturing into the arena again. I can completely accept that as well. I would suggest that not all who decline rematches out of fear are cowards. If i just had my nose broken, i wouldn’t be so quick to enter the ring right away again. I’d prefer to regroup, study what went wrong (like learning to duck!), and try again when ready. I had to learn that the hard way. 

As the old kaynight would say: "I'm not obligated to beat you twice, sir".

As ive stated previously, the only thing that gives you knowledge that you're facing the same person is the username, otherwise, it would be impossible to differentiate based on the variations created. Either way, you have a decision to make. You have to either choose the rematch, or play someone else. What are the motivating factors behind that? I would hope you could differentiate in some significant way the previous player and the next player, other than the fact that you know their username. There is no practical difference between the two, and only a psychological one. Playing someone new is easy to say, but has little to no practical difference other than in the mind, rendering it, in my opinion, a bad reason. I guarantee if you played 50 games without knowing if the opponent was new or the same, you wouldn't be able to tell. Even games between grandmasters who play heavy theory often have completely new positions by move 15-20. In reality, youre not running from "playing the same game" again, but rather the person, which is odd. Why be SO adamant about not playing the same player twice, even if you're playing casually. Obviously you aren't afraid of completion otherwise you wouldn't play a game where you're attempting to beat another. There is something deeper there.

There are 218k players online in live chess at the moment.  I don't even remember the name of whatever random opponent I'm paired against once the game is over and I've moved on.  Why would I care about a rematch when I can play one of the other 218k players, even assuming I actually want another game of chess.

If we're sat at an actual chess board in a room then sure, I might play a few games, but online people are just usernames, no personal connection whatsoever, so whatever the result I'll play someone different the next time.  And I won't remember their name either, nor they mine.

Read my other responses. There is no practical difference between the player you just played and a "new player." The only difference is in your mind where you prefer not to play players who are out for "revenge" or some other motive. Would accepting a rematch for whatever reason, assuming they haven't been abusive, REALLY be that harmful for you? The fact that you consciously choose to not play again does say something about your psyche, I believe, and the idea that "you just wanna play new people" doesn't seem to answer it. 

Exactly, so what's the big deal accepting a rematch if all you have to do Is press accept?

Why always want revenge in chess after a defeat?

There are lots of other solutions.

And then losing is a form of victory!

Kisses to whoever wants

If you believe playing someone is the same (new or previous), the the idea of rematch is moot. Why ask for one?  You can find another opponent in 10 seconds.   The only person with an agenda is the person asking for a rematch.  Having a policy of not rematching anyone, put's one outside of the issue completely.  Ascribing "reasons" for not rematching says more about the person making up the reasons.

Mr. Youreacoward69 seems to overlook one simple fact: People won't rematch with him because they don't want to spend a single extra second in his company. I suspect he has the same difficulties finding "rematches" in real life.

Who says there is a big deal?  There are two options.  My default is to play a new opponent.  Therefore I need a reason to do the other option rather than a reason not to.

You haven't rematched a single one of your opponents on your one day on the site so far, but your account is a good example of why people prefer to only play one game against any given opponent.

So what if they have an "agenda?" You're saying that as if there's some evil plan in the works. Like if you rematch, what exactly is the harm to you? Once again, there is some emotion driving you away from the situation, and you cant say is a harm reductive one because thats absurd. 

The thing is, you don't need an excuse, a reason or an explanation nor do you owe it to anyone. 
But on the other hand, I'd like an explanation of this: " see how the wife is getting on with her marking." ....Curiosity killed the bat.

I'm saying I play for my own reasons and not to satisfy someone's ego.  I don't not play someone because they have an agenda, but rather it's that agenda that initiates threads such as this. 

Im not saying you owe an explanation, just stating there are underlying reasons which people would make It a rule not to rematch, just like there are for someone wanting one. 

Playing when the wife is around?! Opti must be some sort of zen monk.