MauriceEugene wrote:
if you win as black you owe nobody nothing
if you win as white you give 'em white piece
white then run is the worst
Nope. I never rematch, it’s totally symmetric and fair.
If you don’t accept at least one rematch after you win, then you lose.
Sort:
May 16, 2021
0
#503
Control freaks are at it again. Always trying to micromanage other people’s lives
May 16, 2021
0
#505
That might work if everybodys life who were on here is just playing chess. But to have to commit to at least 2 games at a time is too much.
How about if you don't accept at lease one rematch after you win---then you must stand on your head and eat flowers?
uri65 escribió:
SrWaldo wrote:
uri65 escribió:
SrWaldo wrote:
uri65 escribió:
SrWaldo wrote:
uri65 escribió:
SrWaldo wrote:
uri65 escribió:
SrWaldo wrote:
uri65 escribió:
SrWaldo wrote:
uri65 escribió:
SrWaldo wrote:
uri65 escribió:
SrWaldo wrote:
escribió:
SrWaldo wrote:
uri65 escribió:
SrWaldo wrote:
uri65 escribió:
SrWaldo wrote:
I completely agree with this. It's so frustrating to not receive a rematch. Everytime I win, I wait to see if my opponent offers one, if I don't offer it myself. And if I have any majority reason that prevent me from playing again, I explain it.
Why to explain anything? My opponent didn’t explain why he asks a rematch, he just clicked the button, I also just click the button - Decline.
We all know the reason anyone asks for a rematch. They want to try again. It's called sport spirit. Declining a rematch request, however, at least after the very first match and having won, is kind of rude and not very sporty. If you see the rematch challenge and you have a reason that prevents you from playing again, the best would be to excuse yourself rather than ignoring your opponent. Then it's understandable. Anyone with a sport spirit will be willing to play with any opponent a second time, if not now, some other day.
I also have a very obvious reason to decline: I don't want to try again right now, no need to explain it in words, a button click will suffice.
There is nothing rude or unsportsmanlike in declining a rematch request. In competitive chess rematches simply don't exist. Just try to play a rated OTB game in a tourney, ask for a rematch and see the reaction.
I'm pretty sure every grand master has played most of their opponents more than once. A lot of tournaments are the best of 3 or 5, and there's always the next tournament. If you don't feel like trying again right now, that's fine, but it's still rude not to at least excuse yourself and ignore your opponent when they're sending you a request. The best you can do is, if not play the rematch then, send a friend request and play it later.
I have nothing against playing same opponent again when the seek algorithm will pair us up in the future.
Please give me an example of a tournament where it's "the best of 3 or 5". I don't know any. In vast majority of OTB tournaments you play an opponent just once. In 10 years of competitive play as a club member I have never played same player more than once in the same competition. And even if more than one game is played it's predefined by the format of the competition. Format here is simple: one game. Rematch button was added as convenient mean to play more games with same opponent when both want it. Then people like use started inventing "rules" around it.
I have nothing to excuse myself for as I do nothing wrong. We agreed to play one game, that's it. If my opponent doesn't write me why he wants to play again I don't see any need to write him why I don't want it.
For what I've heard there are tournaments in which players play multiple games. If not in chess, in most sports. And even if there aren't, as I said, there's always the next tournament. Saying that you would only play with some opponent if you happen to be forced, like if you're lucky enough to be paired by the algorithm once again, is pretty much the same as not being willing to play with that opponent again, as you're not doing anything form your part to allow that rematch to happen. You can argue that you have the right to leave not giving any excuse, since a rematch is an agreement of both parts; and you'd be right; but it's still ignoring a person, it's still rude and it's still unsportmanlike.
I am glad you agree that there are no rematches (in the sense "let's try again") in competitive chess. It might happen that a GM will play same opponent in another tournament. It's no different for me - it might happen I will play same opponent if paired up by seek algorithm. It's not about willing or not to play him again, I just don't care whom I will play next time, I don't have any preference for him vs some other random anonymous player from the internet. What I certainly don't want is to play him again right now. And I don't feel any need to provide an excuse.
I am not totally "ignoring a person", I clicked Decline button. He is not entitled to anything more just because we've played a game. If this is rude, than he is just as rude by clicking Rematch without explaining his motifs. He could say that he liked my style, or that he wants to play 3 games to see who is better, or that his coach told him to always try to rematch. Just to say anything to be polite. But he silently clicked the button, and so did I.
What is unsportmanlike is not decided by you, it's a question of a consensus. If you check all the answers in this and similar threads you will see that vast majority of players think like me.
Again if you don't want to play again right now, send a friend request and have the rematch later. And yes, you're pretty much ignoring your opponent even if you're clicking "decline". There's no difference in what the opponent sees if you don't say anything.
I don't think you're understanding why I'm saying it's rude if you're trying to say offering the rematch is just as rude with no basis. With all respect, that just sounds like a "No, you" argument. The reason I say it's rude is because the opponent is sending you a message and you're offering nothing in return by either declining it or ignoring it, which have the same effect. The least you can do is say something.
I'm not saying it's unsportsmanlike because I claim to define it. I don't know which part of my message lead you to believe I'm claiming to define it. I think it would make a lot more sense to explain why exactly you think this is not if that's your purpose, rather than just saying not just because I say so. But I digress. The reason I say it's unsportsmanlike is because you're basically making sure not to play with that opponent again, unless you happen to be forced by chance. It would be the same if you just wait to see if you happened to be paired up in the next tournament and denying any friendly match.
I don't want to be friends with some anonymous player just because we played a game. He can equally send me a friend request if he wants to, I will probably accept.
If you consider clicking Rematch as a message, then clicking Decline is a message as well. It's totally symmetric. I don't have to say anything because he didn't say anything neither.
I don't see why I have more obligations (like sending a friend request or a text message) just because I won the game.
It's a consensus in online chess that declining a rematch is perfectly fine regarding the sportsmanship and no excuses should be made. You claim that it's unsportsmanlike looks your own invention and your own definition of a sportsmanship. If it's not then please share with us where you took it from.
"Sportsmanship: behaviour in sport that is fair and shows respect to the other players" (Cambridge dictionary). I follow this code of conduct 100%: I don't say anything abusive in chat, don't ask my opponent to resign in hopeless position, don't celebrate my victory in any inappropriate way. You show bad sportsmanship by not respecting my decision not to play another game. You are a rude person blaming others when they do nothing wrong.
I am making sure not to play with that opponent again right now, you see the difference? Not never, just not right now.
Declining the rematch is not sending a message back, as the opponent doesn't receive any kind of notification whatsoever. And even if they did, it's still just like saying "No" and leaving with no further explanation. Yeah, you don't have any obligation to accept it, but again, declining it, specially after wining the first game, and specially without saying anything, is still not very nice, even if it's not against the rules.
The reason I say it's unsportsmanlike is not because you're breaking the rules, being offensive or anything. Rather, I mean it shows a lack of competitive spirit, having a person in front of you that you know is willing to have another game and putting no effort (except maybe for not blocking them) in allowing that rematch to at least happen another day. If what you say about "not never, just not right now" is true, then that's ok: send a friend request or at least a message.
I gave you several examples of what an explanation could be on his side (liking my style etc.) but I don't get any of this. I get no message and no explanation so I don't send any message and give no explanation. It's totally symmetric, equally polite/rude on both ends.
I have competitive spirit - that's why I played a game. The definition of sportsmanship doesn't say that I have to be willing to compete at any given moment. We played the game, now the competition is over. That's the format here when you issue/accept a seek - it's for one game.
My opponent is just clicking the Rematch button, no effort other than that. He could also send me a friend request and a message suggesting that we play again sometimes later but I have never received such a friend request and message after declining a rematch, never. He is making no effort other than clicking a button, maybe after all it's not so important for him, and that's fine because there are thousands of available players willing to play right now.
I don't know why you don't get it. It's simple. Chess game is played when both want it. If just one wants it it's not enough.
"The competition is over." That's exactly what I mean that shows a lack of competitive spirit. No one with a competitive spirit would want their first match with someone to be their last match. Or any match.
Again, saying "if declining without saying it is rude, then sending it without saying it is rude too", without any basis is just the equivalent of a "No, you" argument. I'm explaining why the fire one is rude: Someone's saying "Would you like to play again", and you're ignoring them.
Also, I think you took to literally the word "effort" and now you're trying to argue the opponent doesn't put effort either, because pressing a button is easy. That's not what I mean. I'm saying you're putting nothing from your part to allow that rematch to happen, and leaving it, if anything, to the chance. Similar to denying someone any friendly match and saying "If we happened to be paired in some other tournament, then we talk."
I gave you a dictionary definition of a sportsmanship. There was nothing about competitive spirit. But as I said you invent your own definitions. How much of competitive spirit is enough is a personal thing and an entirely different question.
If by clicking Rematch he is saying "Would you like to play again?", then by clicking Decline I say "No thank you, another time". If you don't hear what I'm saying it's your problem.
The fact that we played a game doesn't make my opponent somebody special for me. I don't have any preference to play him in the future over thousands of other players. If this game made me special for him then it's up to him to make an effort to play me later.
Like I explained, I'm not talking about being spormanlike anymore, or at least not under that definition. I'm saying it's a lack of competitive spirit to want your first match with someone to be your last match.
What makes my last opponent so special compared to the thousands of people out there? Simpe: It's the person you have in front of me right now, the person who wants to play with me right now and ignoring them is rude.
Also, I think you got too hung up on the very wording I used to describe as an equivalent to a rematch request. What I meant was not to say that sending a rematch request is not rude because you can think of a polite sentence with the same meaning (I guess my wording happened to sound polite). What I meant was that it doesn't really need an explanation, since it's simply a request; at least being a request of something as simple as a game, in the case. The declining, on the other hand, is ignoring a question, which is rude. It would be good to at least see that "no thanks" you mention you're intending.
I am glad you are changing subjects, it's a good sign you are losing this argument. For the record you've already agreed that:
1) there are no rematches in competitive chess
2) declining is not a bad sportsmanship
3) it's ok to decline if I don't want to play right now
You say I am lacking the competitive spirit. I can live with that. The are some people who want to compete all the time, others don't want to compete at all and majority of us somewhere in between. It's just a diversity of human characters. After I finish the game my spirit of analysis and improvement takes over, so I analyze while all the ideas are still fresh in my head. I don't see any problem here. Do you?
I don't ignore person the in front of me who wants to play with me right no, I politely decline. I am not interested, no excuses or explanations are required.
Yes asking for a rematch requires explanation if you want to have higher chances to get it. There can be various reasons and I might sympathize with some of them more than with others. But if you make no effort to convince me to play another game then don't be surprised.
For the 100th time I am not ignoring the question, I am answering negatively. If you want to see "no thanks" as a text then there exists a simple technical solution - ask Chess.com to implement it as an automatic reply when the rematch is declined. Or even better, ask Chess.com to make the text customizable. Then I will write something like: "Thanks for your rematch request. Sorry but I have to decline, I never play two games in a row because I'd like to analyze and to take a small break. Have a nice day!". Until this is implemented I refuse to make more effort than my opponent, refuse to answer a mouse click by anything more that another mouse click.
I suppose that only leaves us with two points to discuss:
I guess adding a message to the rematch can serve a purpose, like adding to convincing the person. However, that's irrelevant. My point is that spending a request does not requiere a message as a decline would in order to be polite.
And yes, as I explained, declining the request without saying anything IS ignoring the person, because 1) The other player doesn't receive any kind of notification, so it's no different than, let's say, closing the app. And 2) Even if they did received something, while not being ignoring, it wouldn't be better than saying "NO." and leaving. Specially if it's after just one game.
I don't see why his button click is polite while mine isn't. It doesn't make any sense.
If the other player doesn't receive any kind of notification it's a problem of user interface, ask chess.com to change it and to add a polite customizable text message if it bothers you.
We agreed to play just one game. The competition is over. The other player is not entitled to anything more than that.
I already explained it. Declining the request without saying anything is rude because you're ignoring a person. As simple as that. I assume you understand why ignoring is rude. If you want to argue that sending the request is rude, then give a reason. Otherwise, it just becomes a "no, you" argument.
As for the notification thing, if you are aware the other player won't receive anything, even though you know it's not your fault, but the app's, that means the best you can do is send the message yourself instead of ignoring them, because, again, you are aware that pressing "decline" and closing the app will just have the same effect. However, that point of mine in the previous comment had a follow up (so this makes me worry about whether you read it completely): Even if there was a notification, that would be no better than saying "NO." and leaving. The worst thing about that kind of argument is that, even if you were right, that would be irrelevant. Even if you can come up with a reason that sending a rematch request is somehow rude, that has nothing to do with weather declining it is rude or not. That's a separate conversation.
As for the argument of "we only agreed to one game", that's true, and I'm not saying accepting a rematch should be an obligation. All I'm saying is, while you're allowed to do it, declining a rematch, without explaining why or saying anything, after winning your first match is not nice.
I don't know what his button click means, it could be "Would you like to play another game please?", or it could be "You just got lucky first time, I will destroy you now". There is no way to know what he is saying because he is saying nothing. He is using a neutral language of button clicks and I use the same. Why should I use a different language? The person who communicates via button clicks is not entitled to be answered in any other way.
What if I didn't win the first game, what if it was a draw or a loss. He asks for a rematch. Should I also explain why I decline? Why the result of our game should make any difference?
Saying offering a rematch is rude because the opponent can have a rudely worded sentence in his head while pressing the button is way too much of a stretch. But again, even if this was a valid reason to say sending the request is rude, that has nothing to do on whether declining it is rude; and it's not analogous to the reason I gave for the later.
As for a rematch offer after losing the game, yeah, I think declining it for no reason wouldn't be very good either, but it's much worse if you're the one who won, since in the former you're just rejecting a second chance, while in the second you're denying a second chance.
I didn't say offering a rematch is rude, I said that I don't know what message is hiding behind it, it could be rude or polite, I have no way to know. I just answer in an equally rude/polite manner.
You still didn't explain me why a rematch request should not be accompanied by a text message, explaining why he wants a rematch. There can be various different reasons for rematching, why doesn't my opponent explain himself?
You still didn't explain me why a mouseclick from my opponent can't be answered by yet another mouseclick. That's the default language of communication defined by chess.com for requesting/accepting/denying rematches.
If my opponent wants a second chance with me so badly he could have sent me a message asking for another game at convenient time. I have never received such a message in 10 years here.
I will not do any extra effort to comfort some hypersensitive people like you. You forget about other people feelings when you start blaming them because suddenly you feel "offended" by something totally normal. You were claiming that declining a rematch is unsportmanlike, but then you failed to support your claim. Wouldn't an apology to all "decliners" be appropriate?
I did explain several times: Adding a message to either a rematch request or a rematch decline can both serve a purpose. However, the reason I'm giving more importance to at least adding a message to the decline is because, unlike the other, it's necessary in order to not be rude, as not doing it would be ignoring a person. Even if you call it "the default language of communication defined by chess.com", that doesn't change the fact that clicking decline doesn't send a notification, and even if it did, it would be no different to saying "No." and leaving.
You can say that, if the opponent wants a rematch so bad, they should be the ones putting effort and sending a message. And that might be true, but that doesn't change the fact that the wordless decline was rude.
Insults don't really add anything to a discussion, if you allow the advice. You can call me "hypersensitive" if you want, but that's irrelevant. Whether I overreact or let it slide, that doesn't change anything: a rude gesture is a rude gesture. One doesn't put extra effort to comfort some hypersensitive people; on edoes it to be polite.
Now, you say that I failed to support my claim that declining a rematch is unsportmanlike. It seems like you missed a few points during the conversation. First of all, let's not forget that I'm not talking simply about declining a rematch, but about declining a rematch after wining your first game with no explanation and not doing anything for that rematch to al least happen another time. Second, I never said that this claim was wrong, but rather, that it wasn't using the definition you offered. When I said "unsportsmanlike", I wasn't talking about behavior issues or braking of rules, but rather about a lack of competitive spirit; but I changed the term I was using after you showed a different definition. Once I explained, however, you accepted it.
SrWaldo wrote: Now, you say that I failed to support my claim that declining a rematch is unsportmanlike. It seems like you missed a few points during the conversation. First of all, let's not forget that I'm not talking simply about declining a rematch, but about declining a rematch after wining your first game with no explanation and not doing anything for that rematch to al least happen another time. Second, I never said that this claim was wrong, but rather, that it wasn't using the definition you offered. When I said "unsportsmanlike", I wasn't talking about behavior issues or braking of rules, but rather about a lack of competitive spirit; but I changed the term I was using after you showed a different definition. Once I explained, however, you accepted it.
If you are responding to something, pls delete the previous quotes. Also, if you want to keep stuff from previous posts to fortify your argument, delete everything except for the important parts. A discussion is best and most effectively enacted when people stay clear, concise, and organized.
May 16, 2021
0
#510
SrWaldo wrote:
uri65 escribió:
SrWaldo wrote:
uri65 escribió:
SrWaldo wrote:
uri65 escribió:
SrWaldo wrote:
uri65 escribió:
SrWaldo wrote:
uri65 escribió:
SrWaldo wrote:
uri65 escribió:
SrWaldo wrote:
uri65 escribió:
SrWaldo wrote:
uri65 escribió:
SrWaldo wrote:
escribió:
SrWaldo wrote:
uri65 escribió:
SrWaldo wrote:
uri65 escribió:
SrWaldo wrote:
I completely agree with this. It's so frustrating to not receive a rematch. Everytime I win, I wait to see if my opponent offers one, if I don't offer it myself. And if I have any majority reason that prevent me from playing again, I explain it.
Why to explain anything? My opponent didn’t explain why he asks a rematch, he just clicked the button, I also just click the button - Decline.
We all know the reason anyone asks for a rematch. They want to try again. It's called sport spirit. Declining a rematch request, however, at least after the very first match and having won, is kind of rude and not very sporty. If you see the rematch challenge and you have a reason that prevents you from playing again, the best would be to excuse yourself rather than ignoring your opponent. Then it's understandable. Anyone with a sport spirit will be willing to play with any opponent a second time, if not now, some other day.
I also have a very obvious reason to decline: I don't want to try again right now, no need to explain it in words, a button click will suffice.
There is nothing rude or unsportsmanlike in declining a rematch request. In competitive chess rematches simply don't exist. Just try to play a rated OTB game in a tourney, ask for a rematch and see the reaction.
I'm pretty sure every grand master has played most of their opponents more than once. A lot of tournaments are the best of 3 or 5, and there's always the next tournament. If you don't feel like trying again right now, that's fine, but it's still rude not to at least excuse yourself and ignore your opponent when they're sending you a request. The best you can do is, if not play the rematch then, send a friend request and play it later.
I have nothing against playing same opponent again when the seek algorithm will pair us up in the future.
Please give me an example of a tournament where it's "the best of 3 or 5". I don't know any. In vast majority of OTB tournaments you play an opponent just once. In 10 years of competitive play as a club member I have never played same player more than once in the same competition. And even if more than one game is played it's predefined by the format of the competition. Format here is simple: one game. Rematch button was added as convenient mean to play more games with same opponent when both want it. Then people like use started inventing "rules" around it.
I have nothing to excuse myself for as I do nothing wrong. We agreed to play one game, that's it. If my opponent doesn't write me why he wants to play again I don't see any need to write him why I don't want it.
For what I've heard there are tournaments in which players play multiple games. If not in chess, in most sports. And even if there aren't, as I said, there's always the next tournament. Saying that you would only play with some opponent if you happen to be forced, like if you're lucky enough to be paired by the algorithm once again, is pretty much the same as not being willing to play with that opponent again, as you're not doing anything form your part to allow that rematch to happen. You can argue that you have the right to leave not giving any excuse, since a rematch is an agreement of both parts; and you'd be right; but it's still ignoring a person, it's still rude and it's still unsportmanlike.
I am glad you agree that there are no rematches (in the sense "let's try again") in competitive chess. It might happen that a GM will play same opponent in another tournament. It's no different for me - it might happen I will play same opponent if paired up by seek algorithm. It's not about willing or not to play him again, I just don't care whom I will play next time, I don't have any preference for him vs some other random anonymous player from the internet. What I certainly don't want is to play him again right now. And I don't feel any need to provide an excuse.
I am not totally "ignoring a person", I clicked Decline button. He is not entitled to anything more just because we've played a game. If this is rude, than he is just as rude by clicking Rematch without explaining his motifs. He could say that he liked my style, or that he wants to play 3 games to see who is better, or that his coach told him to always try to rematch. Just to say anything to be polite. But he silently clicked the button, and so did I.
What is unsportmanlike is not decided by you, it's a question of a consensus. If you check all the answers in this and similar threads you will see that vast majority of players think like me.
Again if you don't want to play again right now, send a friend request and have the rematch later. And yes, you're pretty much ignoring your opponent even if you're clicking "decline". There's no difference in what the opponent sees if you don't say anything.
I don't think you're understanding why I'm saying it's rude if you're trying to say offering the rematch is just as rude with no basis. With all respect, that just sounds like a "No, you" argument. The reason I say it's rude is because the opponent is sending you a message and you're offering nothing in return by either declining it or ignoring it, which have the same effect. The least you can do is say something.
I'm not saying it's unsportsmanlike because I claim to define it. I don't know which part of my message lead you to believe I'm claiming to define it. I think it would make a lot more sense to explain why exactly you think this is not if that's your purpose, rather than just saying not just because I say so. But I digress. The reason I say it's unsportsmanlike is because you're basically making sure not to play with that opponent again, unless you happen to be forced by chance. It would be the same if you just wait to see if you happened to be paired up in the next tournament and denying any friendly match.
I don't want to be friends with some anonymous player just because we played a game. He can equally send me a friend request if he wants to, I will probably accept.
If you consider clicking Rematch as a message, then clicking Decline is a message as well. It's totally symmetric. I don't have to say anything because he didn't say anything neither.
I don't see why I have more obligations (like sending a friend request or a text message) just because I won the game.
It's a consensus in online chess that declining a rematch is perfectly fine regarding the sportsmanship and no excuses should be made. You claim that it's unsportsmanlike looks your own invention and your own definition of a sportsmanship. If it's not then please share with us where you took it from.
"Sportsmanship: behaviour in sport that is fair and shows respect to the other players" (Cambridge dictionary). I follow this code of conduct 100%: I don't say anything abusive in chat, don't ask my opponent to resign in hopeless position, don't celebrate my victory in any inappropriate way. You show bad sportsmanship by not respecting my decision not to play another game. You are a rude person blaming others when they do nothing wrong.
I am making sure not to play with that opponent again right now, you see the difference? Not never, just not right now.
Declining the rematch is not sending a message back, as the opponent doesn't receive any kind of notification whatsoever. And even if they did, it's still just like saying "No" and leaving with no further explanation. Yeah, you don't have any obligation to accept it, but again, declining it, specially after wining the first game, and specially without saying anything, is still not very nice, even if it's not against the rules.
The reason I say it's unsportsmanlike is not because you're breaking the rules, being offensive or anything. Rather, I mean it shows a lack of competitive spirit, having a person in front of you that you know is willing to have another game and putting no effort (except maybe for not blocking them) in allowing that rematch to at least happen another day. If what you say about "not never, just not right now" is true, then that's ok: send a friend request or at least a message.
I gave you several examples of what an explanation could be on his side (liking my style etc.) but I don't get any of this. I get no message and no explanation so I don't send any message and give no explanation. It's totally symmetric, equally polite/rude on both ends.
I have competitive spirit - that's why I played a game. The definition of sportsmanship doesn't say that I have to be willing to compete at any given moment. We played the game, now the competition is over. That's the format here when you issue/accept a seek - it's for one game.
My opponent is just clicking the Rematch button, no effort other than that. He could also send me a friend request and a message suggesting that we play again sometimes later but I have never received such a friend request and message after declining a rematch, never. He is making no effort other than clicking a button, maybe after all it's not so important for him, and that's fine because there are thousands of available players willing to play right now.
I don't know why you don't get it. It's simple. Chess game is played when both want it. If just one wants it it's not enough.
"The competition is over." That's exactly what I mean that shows a lack of competitive spirit. No one with a competitive spirit would want their first match with someone to be their last match. Or any match.
Again, saying "if declining without saying it is rude, then sending it without saying it is rude too", without any basis is just the equivalent of a "No, you" argument. I'm explaining why the fire one is rude: Someone's saying "Would you like to play again", and you're ignoring them.
Also, I think you took to literally the word "effort" and now you're trying to argue the opponent doesn't put effort either, because pressing a button is easy. That's not what I mean. I'm saying you're putting nothing from your part to allow that rematch to happen, and leaving it, if anything, to the chance. Similar to denying someone any friendly match and saying "If we happened to be paired in some other tournament, then we talk."
I gave you a dictionary definition of a sportsmanship. There was nothing about competitive spirit. But as I said you invent your own definitions. How much of competitive spirit is enough is a personal thing and an entirely different question.
If by clicking Rematch he is saying "Would you like to play again?", then by clicking Decline I say "No thank you, another time". If you don't hear what I'm saying it's your problem.
The fact that we played a game doesn't make my opponent somebody special for me. I don't have any preference to play him in the future over thousands of other players. If this game made me special for him then it's up to him to make an effort to play me later.
Like I explained, I'm not talking about being spormanlike anymore, or at least not under that definition. I'm saying it's a lack of competitive spirit to want your first match with someone to be your last match.
What makes my last opponent so special compared to the thousands of people out there? Simpe: It's the person you have in front of me right now, the person who wants to play with me right now and ignoring them is rude.
Also, I think you got too hung up on the very wording I used to describe as an equivalent to a rematch request. What I meant was not to say that sending a rematch request is not rude because you can think of a polite sentence with the same meaning (I guess my wording happened to sound polite). What I meant was that it doesn't really need an explanation, since it's simply a request; at least being a request of something as simple as a game, in the case. The declining, on the other hand, is ignoring a question, which is rude. It would be good to at least see that "no thanks" you mention you're intending.
I am glad you are changing subjects, it's a good sign you are losing this argument. For the record you've already agreed that:
1) there are no rematches in competitive chess
2) declining is not a bad sportsmanship
3) it's ok to decline if I don't want to play right now
You say I am lacking the competitive spirit. I can live with that. The are some people who want to compete all the time, others don't want to compete at all and majority of us somewhere in between. It's just a diversity of human characters. After I finish the game my spirit of analysis and improvement takes over, so I analyze while all the ideas are still fresh in my head. I don't see any problem here. Do you?
I don't ignore person the in front of me who wants to play with me right no, I politely decline. I am not interested, no excuses or explanations are required.
Yes asking for a rematch requires explanation if you want to have higher chances to get it. There can be various reasons and I might sympathize with some of them more than with others. But if you make no effort to convince me to play another game then don't be surprised.
For the 100th time I am not ignoring the question, I am answering negatively. If you want to see "no thanks" as a text then there exists a simple technical solution - ask Chess.com to implement it as an automatic reply when the rematch is declined. Or even better, ask Chess.com to make the text customizable. Then I will write something like: "Thanks for your rematch request. Sorry but I have to decline, I never play two games in a row because I'd like to analyze and to take a small break. Have a nice day!". Until this is implemented I refuse to make more effort than my opponent, refuse to answer a mouse click by anything more that another mouse click.
I suppose that only leaves us with two points to discuss:
I guess adding a message to the rematch can serve a purpose, like adding to convincing the person. However, that's irrelevant. My point is that spending a request does not requiere a message as a decline would in order to be polite.
And yes, as I explained, declining the request without saying anything IS ignoring the person, because 1) The other player doesn't receive any kind of notification, so it's no different than, let's say, closing the app. And 2) Even if they did received something, while not being ignoring, it wouldn't be better than saying "NO." and leaving. Specially if it's after just one game.
I don't see why his button click is polite while mine isn't. It doesn't make any sense.
If the other player doesn't receive any kind of notification it's a problem of user interface, ask chess.com to change it and to add a polite customizable text message if it bothers you.
We agreed to play just one game. The competition is over. The other player is not entitled to anything more than that.
I already explained it. Declining the request without saying anything is rude because you're ignoring a person. As simple as that. I assume you understand why ignoring is rude. If you want to argue that sending the request is rude, then give a reason. Otherwise, it just becomes a "no, you" argument.
As for the notification thing, if you are aware the other player won't receive anything, even though you know it's not your fault, but the app's, that means the best you can do is send the message yourself instead of ignoring them, because, again, you are aware that pressing "decline" and closing the app will just have the same effect. However, that point of mine in the previous comment had a follow up (so this makes me worry about whether you read it completely): Even if there was a notification, that would be no better than saying "NO." and leaving. The worst thing about that kind of argument is that, even if you were right, that would be irrelevant. Even if you can come up with a reason that sending a rematch request is somehow rude, that has nothing to do with weather declining it is rude or not. That's a separate conversation.
As for the argument of "we only agreed to one game", that's true, and I'm not saying accepting a rematch should be an obligation. All I'm saying is, while you're allowed to do it, declining a rematch, without explaining why or saying anything, after winning your first match is not nice.
I don't know what his button click means, it could be "Would you like to play another game please?", or it could be "You just got lucky first time, I will destroy you now". There is no way to know what he is saying because he is saying nothing. He is using a neutral language of button clicks and I use the same. Why should I use a different language? The person who communicates via button clicks is not entitled to be answered in any other way.
What if I didn't win the first game, what if it was a draw or a loss. He asks for a rematch. Should I also explain why I decline? Why the result of our game should make any difference?
Saying offering a rematch is rude because the opponent can have a rudely worded sentence in his head while pressing the button is way too much of a stretch. But again, even if this was a valid reason to say sending the request is rude, that has nothing to do on whether declining it is rude; and it's not analogous to the reason I gave for the later.
As for a rematch offer after losing the game, yeah, I think declining it for no reason wouldn't be very good either, but it's much worse if you're the one who won, since in the former you're just rejecting a second chance, while in the second you're denying a second chance.
I didn't say offering a rematch is rude, I said that I don't know what message is hiding behind it, it could be rude or polite, I have no way to know. I just answer in an equally rude/polite manner.
You still didn't explain me why a rematch request should not be accompanied by a text message, explaining why he wants a rematch. There can be various different reasons for rematching, why doesn't my opponent explain himself?
You still didn't explain me why a mouseclick from my opponent can't be answered by yet another mouseclick. That's the default language of communication defined by chess.com for requesting/accepting/denying rematches.
If my opponent wants a second chance with me so badly he could have sent me a message asking for another game at convenient time. I have never received such a message in 10 years here.
I will not do any extra effort to comfort some hypersensitive people like you. You forget about other people feelings when you start blaming them because suddenly you feel "offended" by something totally normal. You were claiming that declining a rematch is unsportmanlike, but then you failed to support your claim. Wouldn't an apology to all "decliners" be appropriate?
I did explain several times: Adding a message to either a rematch request or a rematch decline can both serve a purpose. However, the reason I'm giving more importance to at least adding a message to the decline is because, unlike the other, it's necessary in order to not be rude, as not doing it would be ignoring a person. Even if you call it "the default language of communication defined by chess.com", that doesn't change the fact that clicking decline doesn't send a notification, and even if it did, it would be no different to saying "No." and leaving.
You can say that, if the opponent wants a rematch so bad, they should be the ones putting effort and sending a message. And that might be true, but that doesn't change the fact that the wordless decline was rude.
Insults don't really add anything to a discussion, if you allow the advice. You can call me "hypersensitive" if you want, but that's irrelevant. Whether I overreact or let it slide, that doesn't change anything: a rude gesture is a rude gesture. One doesn't put extra effort to comfort some hypersensitive people; on edoes it to be polite.
Now, you say that I failed to support my claim that declining a rematch is unsportmanlike. It seems like you missed a few points during the conversation. First of all, let's not forget that I'm not talking simply about declining a rematch, but about declining a rematch after wining your first game with no explanation and not doing anything for that rematch to al least happen another time. Second, I never said that this claim was wrong, but rather, that it wasn't using the definition you offered. When I said "unsportsmanlike", I wasn't talking about behavior issues or braking of rules, but rather about a lack of competitive spirit; but I changed the term I was using after you showed a different definition. Once I explained, however, you accepted it.
But I'm playing chess online to have fun and not to type out explanations for all the people I beat lol
Marco wrote:
But I'm playing chess online to have fun and not to type out explanations for all the people I beat lol
Please keep the quoting down to a reasonable level
SrWaldo wrote:
We can’t continue thus discussion if you don’t apologize. Before teaching others to be polite try to be polite yourself.
May 16, 2021
0
#513
churchstreet wrote:
“maybe I've got something else to do — go to work, go to bed, go to the bathroom, make dinner...I don't see why I need to feel obligated to accept a rematch or explain myself.”
In that case you won’t need use of your account temporarily and a rematch clause can temporarily (5 mins) ban anyone that doesn’t accept the rematch
In that case you won’t need use of your account temporarily and a rematch clause can temporarily (5 mins) ban anyone that doesn’t accept the rematch
Yeah, let's just make up our own rules! Personally I hate check and checkmate, so why can't the winner be the one that takes all the other guy's pieces first?
uri65 escribió:
SrWaldo wrote:
We can’t continue thus discussion if you don’t apologize. Before teaching others to be polite try to be polite yourself.
I apologice if I offended you.
Marco escribió:
SrWaldo wrote:
uri65 escribió:
SrWaldo wrote:
uri65 escribió:
SrWaldo wrote:
uri65 escribió:
SrWaldo wrote:
uri65 escribió:
SrWaldo wrote:
uri65 escribió:
SrWaldo wrote:
uri65 escribió:
SrWaldo wrote:
uri65 escribió:
SrWaldo wrote:
uri65 escribió:
SrWaldo wrote:
escribió:
SrWaldo wrote:
uri65 escribió:
SrWaldo wrote:
uri65 escribió:
SrWaldo wrote:
I completely agree with this. It's so frustrating to not receive a rematch. Everytime I win, I wait to see if my opponent offers one, if I don't offer it myself. And if I have any majority reason that prevent me from playing again, I explain it.
Why to explain anything? My opponent didn’t explain why he asks a rematch, he just clicked the button, I also just click the button - Decline.
We all know the reason anyone asks for a rematch. They want to try again. It's called sport spirit. Declining a rematch request, however, at least after the very first match and having won, is kind of rude and not very sporty. If you see the rematch challenge and you have a reason that prevents you from playing again, the best would be to excuse yourself rather than ignoring your opponent. Then it's understandable. Anyone with a sport spirit will be willing to play with any opponent a second time, if not now, some other day.
I also have a very obvious reason to decline: I don't want to try again right now, no need to explain it in words, a button click will suffice.
There is nothing rude or unsportsmanlike in declining a rematch request. In competitive chess rematches simply don't exist. Just try to play a rated OTB game in a tourney, ask for a rematch and see the reaction.
I'm pretty sure every grand master has played most of their opponents more than once. A lot of tournaments are the best of 3 or 5, and there's always the next tournament. If you don't feel like trying again right now, that's fine, but it's still rude not to at least excuse yourself and ignore your opponent when they're sending you a request. The best you can do is, if not play the rematch then, send a friend request and play it later.
I have nothing against playing same opponent again when the seek algorithm will pair us up in the future.
Please give me an example of a tournament where it's "the best of 3 or 5". I don't know any. In vast majority of OTB tournaments you play an opponent just once. In 10 years of competitive play as a club member I have never played same player more than once in the same competition. And even if more than one game is played it's predefined by the format of the competition. Format here is simple: one game. Rematch button was added as convenient mean to play more games with same opponent when both want it. Then people like use started inventing "rules" around it.
I have nothing to excuse myself for as I do nothing wrong. We agreed to play one game, that's it. If my opponent doesn't write me why he wants to play again I don't see any need to write him why I don't want it.
For what I've heard there are tournaments in which players play multiple games. If not in chess, in most sports. And even if there aren't, as I said, there's always the next tournament. Saying that you would only play with some opponent if you happen to be forced, like if you're lucky enough to be paired by the algorithm once again, is pretty much the same as not being willing to play with that opponent again, as you're not doing anything form your part to allow that rematch to happen. You can argue that you have the right to leave not giving any excuse, since a rematch is an agreement of both parts; and you'd be right; but it's still ignoring a person, it's still rude and it's still unsportmanlike.
I am glad you agree that there are no rematches (in the sense "let's try again") in competitive chess. It might happen that a GM will play same opponent in another tournament. It's no different for me - it might happen I will play same opponent if paired up by seek algorithm. It's not about willing or not to play him again, I just don't care whom I will play next time, I don't have any preference for him vs some other random anonymous player from the internet. What I certainly don't want is to play him again right now. And I don't feel any need to provide an excuse.
I am not totally "ignoring a person", I clicked Decline button. He is not entitled to anything more just because we've played a game. If this is rude, than he is just as rude by clicking Rematch without explaining his motifs. He could say that he liked my style, or that he wants to play 3 games to see who is better, or that his coach told him to always try to rematch. Just to say anything to be polite. But he silently clicked the button, and so did I.
What is unsportmanlike is not decided by you, it's a question of a consensus. If you check all the answers in this and similar threads you will see that vast majority of players think like me.
Again if you don't want to play again right now, send a friend request and have the rematch later. And yes, you're pretty much ignoring your opponent even if you're clicking "decline". There's no difference in what the opponent sees if you don't say anything.
I don't think you're understanding why I'm saying it's rude if you're trying to say offering the rematch is just as rude with no basis. With all respect, that just sounds like a "No, you" argument. The reason I say it's rude is because the opponent is sending you a message and you're offering nothing in return by either declining it or ignoring it, which have the same effect. The least you can do is say something.
I'm not saying it's unsportsmanlike because I claim to define it. I don't know which part of my message lead you to believe I'm claiming to define it. I think it would make a lot more sense to explain why exactly you think this is not if that's your purpose, rather than just saying not just because I say so. But I digress. The reason I say it's unsportsmanlike is because you're basically making sure not to play with that opponent again, unless you happen to be forced by chance. It would be the same if you just wait to see if you happened to be paired up in the next tournament and denying any friendly match.
I don't want to be friends with some anonymous player just because we played a game. He can equally send me a friend request if he wants to, I will probably accept.
If you consider clicking Rematch as a message, then clicking Decline is a message as well. It's totally symmetric. I don't have to say anything because he didn't say anything neither.
I don't see why I have more obligations (like sending a friend request or a text message) just because I won the game.
It's a consensus in online chess that declining a rematch is perfectly fine regarding the sportsmanship and no excuses should be made. You claim that it's unsportsmanlike looks your own invention and your own definition of a sportsmanship. If it's not then please share with us where you took it from.
"Sportsmanship: behaviour in sport that is fair and shows respect to the other players" (Cambridge dictionary). I follow this code of conduct 100%: I don't say anything abusive in chat, don't ask my opponent to resign in hopeless position, don't celebrate my victory in any inappropriate way. You show bad sportsmanship by not respecting my decision not to play another game. You are a rude person blaming others when they do nothing wrong.
I am making sure not to play with that opponent again right now, you see the difference? Not never, just not right now.
Declining the rematch is not sending a message back, as the opponent doesn't receive any kind of notification whatsoever. And even if they did, it's still just like saying "No" and leaving with no further explanation. Yeah, you don't have any obligation to accept it, but again, declining it, specially after wining the first game, and specially without saying anything, is still not very nice, even if it's not against the rules.
The reason I say it's unsportsmanlike is not because you're breaking the rules, being offensive or anything. Rather, I mean it shows a lack of competitive spirit, having a person in front of you that you know is willing to have another game and putting no effort (except maybe for not blocking them) in allowing that rematch to at least happen another day. If what you say about "not never, just not right now" is true, then that's ok: send a friend request or at least a message.
I gave you several examples of what an explanation could be on his side (liking my style etc.) but I don't get any of this. I get no message and no explanation so I don't send any message and give no explanation. It's totally symmetric, equally polite/rude on both ends.
I have competitive spirit - that's why I played a game. The definition of sportsmanship doesn't say that I have to be willing to compete at any given moment. We played the game, now the competition is over. That's the format here when you issue/accept a seek - it's for one game.
My opponent is just clicking the Rematch button, no effort other than that. He could also send me a friend request and a message suggesting that we play again sometimes later but I have never received such a friend request and message after declining a rematch, never. He is making no effort other than clicking a button, maybe after all it's not so important for him, and that's fine because there are thousands of available players willing to play right now.
I don't know why you don't get it. It's simple. Chess game is played when both want it. If just one wants it it's not enough.
"The competition is over." That's exactly what I mean that shows a lack of competitive spirit. No one with a competitive spirit would want their first match with someone to be their last match. Or any match.
Again, saying "if declining without saying it is rude, then sending it without saying it is rude too", without any basis is just the equivalent of a "No, you" argument. I'm explaining why the fire one is rude: Someone's saying "Would you like to play again", and you're ignoring them.
Also, I think you took to literally the word "effort" and now you're trying to argue the opponent doesn't put effort either, because pressing a button is easy. That's not what I mean. I'm saying you're putting nothing from your part to allow that rematch to happen, and leaving it, if anything, to the chance. Similar to denying someone any friendly match and saying "If we happened to be paired in some other tournament, then we talk."
I gave you a dictionary definition of a sportsmanship. There was nothing about competitive spirit. But as I said you invent your own definitions. How much of competitive spirit is enough is a personal thing and an entirely different question.
If by clicking Rematch he is saying "Would you like to play again?", then by clicking Decline I say "No thank you, another time". If you don't hear what I'm saying it's your problem.
The fact that we played a game doesn't make my opponent somebody special for me. I don't have any preference to play him in the future over thousands of other players. If this game made me special for him then it's up to him to make an effort to play me later.
Like I explained, I'm not talking about being spormanlike anymore, or at least not under that definition. I'm saying it's a lack of competitive spirit to want your first match with someone to be your last match.
What makes my last opponent so special compared to the thousands of people out there? Simpe: It's the person you have in front of me right now, the person who wants to play with me right now and ignoring them is rude.
Also, I think you got too hung up on the very wording I used to describe as an equivalent to a rematch request. What I meant was not to say that sending a rematch request is not rude because you can think of a polite sentence with the same meaning (I guess my wording happened to sound polite). What I meant was that it doesn't really need an explanation, since it's simply a request; at least being a request of something as simple as a game, in the case. The declining, on the other hand, is ignoring a question, which is rude. It would be good to at least see that "no thanks" you mention you're intending.
I am glad you are changing subjects, it's a good sign you are losing this argument. For the record you've already agreed that:
1) there are no rematches in competitive chess
2) declining is not a bad sportsmanship
3) it's ok to decline if I don't want to play right now
You say I am lacking the competitive spirit. I can live with that. The are some people who want to compete all the time, others don't want to compete at all and majority of us somewhere in between. It's just a diversity of human characters. After I finish the game my spirit of analysis and improvement takes over, so I analyze while all the ideas are still fresh in my head. I don't see any problem here. Do you?
I don't ignore person the in front of me who wants to play with me right no, I politely decline. I am not interested, no excuses or explanations are required.
Yes asking for a rematch requires explanation if you want to have higher chances to get it. There can be various reasons and I might sympathize with some of them more than with others. But if you make no effort to convince me to play another game then don't be surprised.
For the 100th time I am not ignoring the question, I am answering negatively. If you want to see "no thanks" as a text then there exists a simple technical solution - ask Chess.com to implement it as an automatic reply when the rematch is declined. Or even better, ask Chess.com to make the text customizable. Then I will write something like: "Thanks for your rematch request. Sorry but I have to decline, I never play two games in a row because I'd like to analyze and to take a small break. Have a nice day!". Until this is implemented I refuse to make more effort than my opponent, refuse to answer a mouse click by anything more that another mouse click.
I suppose that only leaves us with two points to discuss:
I guess adding a message to the rematch can serve a purpose, like adding to convincing the person. However, that's irrelevant. My point is that spending a request does not requiere a message as a decline would in order to be polite.
And yes, as I explained, declining the request without saying anything IS ignoring the person, because 1) The other player doesn't receive any kind of notification, so it's no different than, let's say, closing the app. And 2) Even if they did received something, while not being ignoring, it wouldn't be better than saying "NO." and leaving. Specially if it's after just one game.
I don't see why his button click is polite while mine isn't. It doesn't make any sense.
If the other player doesn't receive any kind of notification it's a problem of user interface, ask chess.com to change it and to add a polite customizable text message if it bothers you.
We agreed to play just one game. The competition is over. The other player is not entitled to anything more than that.
I already explained it. Declining the request without saying anything is rude because you're ignoring a person. As simple as that. I assume you understand why ignoring is rude. If you want to argue that sending the request is rude, then give a reason. Otherwise, it just becomes a "no, you" argument.
As for the notification thing, if you are aware the other player won't receive anything, even though you know it's not your fault, but the app's, that means the best you can do is send the message yourself instead of ignoring them, because, again, you are aware that pressing "decline" and closing the app will just have the same effect. However, that point of mine in the previous comment had a follow up (so this makes me worry about whether you read it completely): Even if there was a notification, that would be no better than saying "NO." and leaving. The worst thing about that kind of argument is that, even if you were right, that would be irrelevant. Even if you can come up with a reason that sending a rematch request is somehow rude, that has nothing to do with weather declining it is rude or not. That's a separate conversation.
As for the argument of "we only agreed to one game", that's true, and I'm not saying accepting a rematch should be an obligation. All I'm saying is, while you're allowed to do it, declining a rematch, without explaining why or saying anything, after winning your first match is not nice.
I don't know what his button click means, it could be "Would you like to play another game please?", or it could be "You just got lucky first time, I will destroy you now". There is no way to know what he is saying because he is saying nothing. He is using a neutral language of button clicks and I use the same. Why should I use a different language? The person who communicates via button clicks is not entitled to be answered in any other way.
What if I didn't win the first game, what if it was a draw or a loss. He asks for a rematch. Should I also explain why I decline? Why the result of our game should make any difference?
Saying offering a rematch is rude because the opponent can have a rudely worded sentence in his head while pressing the button is way too much of a stretch. But again, even if this was a valid reason to say sending the request is rude, that has nothing to do on whether declining it is rude; and it's not analogous to the reason I gave for the later.
As for a rematch offer after losing the game, yeah, I think declining it for no reason wouldn't be very good either, but it's much worse if you're the one who won, since in the former you're just rejecting a second chance, while in the second you're denying a second chance.
I didn't say offering a rematch is rude, I said that I don't know what message is hiding behind it, it could be rude or polite, I have no way to know. I just answer in an equally rude/polite manner.
You still didn't explain me why a rematch request should not be accompanied by a text message, explaining why he wants a rematch. There can be various different reasons for rematching, why doesn't my opponent explain himself?
You still didn't explain me why a mouseclick from my opponent can't be answered by yet another mouseclick. That's the default language of communication defined by chess.com for requesting/accepting/denying rematches.
If my opponent wants a second chance with me so badly he could have sent me a message asking for another game at convenient time. I have never received such a message in 10 years here.
I will not do any extra effort to comfort some hypersensitive people like you. You forget about other people feelings when you start blaming them because suddenly you feel "offended" by something totally normal. You were claiming that declining a rematch is unsportmanlike, but then you failed to support your claim. Wouldn't an apology to all "decliners" be appropriate?
I did explain several times: Adding a message to either a rematch request or a rematch decline can both serve a purpose. However, the reason I'm giving more importance to at least adding a message to the decline is because, unlike the other, it's necessary in order to not be rude, as not doing it would be ignoring a person. Even if you call it "the default language of communication defined by chess.com", that doesn't change the fact that clicking decline doesn't send a notification, and even if it did, it would be no different to saying "No." and leaving.
You can say that, if the opponent wants a rematch so bad, they should be the ones putting effort and sending a message. And that might be true, but that doesn't change the fact that the wordless decline was rude.
Insults don't really add anything to a discussion, if you allow the advice. You can call me "hypersensitive" if you want, but that's irrelevant. Whether I overreact or let it slide, that doesn't change anything: a rude gesture is a rude gesture. One doesn't put extra effort to comfort some hypersensitive people; on edoes it to be polite.
Now, you say that I failed to support my claim that declining a rematch is unsportmanlike. It seems like you missed a few points during the conversation. First of all, let's not forget that I'm not talking simply about declining a rematch, but about declining a rematch after wining your first game with no explanation and not doing anything for that rematch to al least happen another time. Second, I never said that this claim was wrong, but rather, that it wasn't using the definition you offered. When I said "unsportsmanlike", I wasn't talking about behavior issues or braking of rules, but rather about a lack of competitive spirit; but I changed the term I was using after you showed a different definition. Once I explained, however, you accepted it.
But I'm playing chess online to have fun and not to type out explanations for all the people I beat lol
That doesn't really have anything to do with our discussion. Neither of say said anything about giving explanations for winning.
SrWaldo wrote:
uri65 escribió:
SrWaldo wrote:
We can’t continue thus discussion if you don’t apologize. Before teaching others to be polite try to be polite yourself.
I apologice if I offended you.
Thank you, I really appreciate.
We are at a point in our discussion where we just have to agree to disagree.
I will restate my position: ignoring someone on the internet is a common thing when you are not interested. I ignore friend requests (here or on Facebook or elsewhere), challenges, etc. All this ignoring is done with just one click, no words are said which is fine because the original request was done with just one click too.
We agreed to play one game and I gave you my fullest attention during this game. The fact that we've played a game does not mean any explanation should be given regarding why I don't want to play yet another game. You ask with a click, I reply with a click. To me it looks totally normal, to vast majority of players it looks totally normal too. If you think I am rude because I'm ignoring you - no problem, it will not change my behavior.
uri65 wrote:
I will restate my position: ignoring someone on the internet is a common thing when you are not interested. I ignore friend requests (here or on Facebook or elsewhere), challenges, etc. All this ignoring is done with just one click, no words are said which is fine because the original request was done with just one click too.
This is pretty much it. Requiring me to respond personally to every attempt at communication gives others power over me that they do not merit.
(to those that think just ignoring people is rude...)
Without some context of friendship or like prior relationship, expecting me to respond is a very aggressive attitude that assumes that you are entitled to my attention. It allows you to put me on the defensive by making a mere request. The world and its people owe you no explanation for not wanting to engage with you. Thinking that they do is aggressive and toxic.
If you are the sort of person who gets upset when you are ignored in this context, you really need to reassess your behavior in general as it indicates a level of obliviousness that may not end well. This sort of entitlement will possibly lead you to believe you are justified in harassing those that simply do not want to give you their time and that leads to dark places.
May 17, 2021
0
#518
@SrWaldo OK let me make my post clearer. You mentioned that if you beat a player and they ask for a rematch, you need to write them an explanation unless you're being rude and I said that makes no sense to me because you owe no one any explanation for not rematching except if you and your opponent are good friends.
I usually don't rematch because I exclusively play one opening, and I don't want to play people that are already exposed to it and know how to counter it.
Marco escribió:
@SrWaldo OK let me make my post clearer. You mentioned that if you beat a player and they ask for a rematch, you need to write them an explanation unless you're being rude and I said that makes no sense to me because you owe no one any explanation for not rematching except if you and your opponent are good friends.
The thing is we are also talking about having only played one single game after which you won, and your opponent wants to try again. Not accepting a single rematch after having won, not sending a friend request or anything to at least make it happen later, is pretty much making sure that rematch doesn't happen, which shows a lack of competitive spirit and leaves the opponents without any chance of trying again. If you're going to do that, you could at least say something (a part that got too much focus in the conversation, I'd say). Yes, it's not your obligation to do so, but not doing so is not very nice.
No