Is Saying "GG" at the End of a Game a Sign of Victor's Mercy

What scares me about you is how you completely and utterly fail to understand situational aspects of human nature. It's like you're coming off as 'Data' from Star Trek, trying desperately understand what it means to have human emotion, empathy, and the ability to spot disingenuous behavior. Our human experiences cannot be approached and evaluated from a superficial perspective as you have consistently shown to prefer.

See, this is a perfect example. You've choosen not to respond to my honest question, but rather to attempt to marginalize me for asking it. Why do that? It is neither necessary nor productive. 

Like it or not, you MUST take into account the situation at hand. As we grow and stock up experiences in dealing with other humans, we gain the ability to accurately determine when a person is being honest or disingenuous.  You, on the other hand, feel is it a severe psychological fault to even attempt to do that. It is this belief that scares me about people like you. You're either completely gullable or an emotionless sociopath.

The point is that this is a game. Even if someone is being disingenuous over their parting comment in a 5 minute chess game, why care?! What possible meaningful impact does it have upon you or your life? Moreover, why choose to insult me for pointing out that one's emotional energies can be spent on more meaningful concerns? 

Now the question is: Is saying GG after a game by itself rude or insulting? Of course not. So why is there even a thread about it? Because there are situations where it in fact does become rude or insulting. As a human, you can determine for yourself when that comes about. For me, it's when somebody says it while the game is still active and not yet over, but your opponent says it anyway while you're still judging the position on the board. Am I somehow less of a human being than you because I evaluated the saying as being disingenuous of my opponent in this manner? According to you, I absolutely would be.

Again, you're seeing personal insults in an honest question. Do my questions threaten you that you need to attack me? 

Emotionally stable adult human beings have the capacity to choose to react or not to the harmless, mindless behavior of others. My question is what benefit does it bring someone to get upset about what happens over a chess game. I personally see no benefit to the individual getting upset. So why do it? 

Do folks think that they play better to be caught up in some perceived insult? Do they get pleasure out of self-righteous indignation over perceived slights? 

It's just like in the other thread about rematch refusals. I pointed out there are club OTB situations where refusing a rematch after a lucky win in a lost position will earn you a negative reputation. You then insulted me by claiming I'm severely character-flawed because I assign cowardice in such motivations. In reality, one need merely look at the situation to reach a logical conclusion:

No, I pointed out that assigning motivation to other's actions without warrant in order to perceive a slight is a character flaw. And it is. I did not insult you as I do not know that you do in fact assign motivations to other's actions with such flippancy. Though with this response of yours and your private message I'm certainly beginning to suspect that your intent is to prove to everyone the content of your character. 

"Bob" goes to a local chess club. He plays "John" and started getting into a bad postion. During the time scamble at the end, "John" is unable to deliver checkmate in time and loses. "Bob" then refuses a rematch and instead goes over to play somebody else. Later on when "Bob" does lose a game, he is more than willing to play a rematch. "Bob" continues this policy until pretty soon nobody at the club will offer him a game any more. Conclusion: Bob's cowardly behavior is offputting by other members of the club and it costs him.

*Chuckle* Of course you seem to believe that a rematch is somehow owed to you. Why? And why not recognize that "Bob" might simply not have an interest in playing people that he realizes he can't give a good game to? 

There are people at my club I won't play repeatedly. Why? Because they can beat me without even looking at the board. I'm not competition for them, and you know what -- they know that too! They'll be nice enough to play a game with me whenever I ask because they know I won't try to hog their attention and I'll be considerate enough to let them play people more their level after they beat me severely and I can then spend some time trying to learn from the experience.  

Further, there are people I can beat without much effort as well. I'm more than willing to play a game with them and analyze it afterwards, but I don't have much interest in playing them repeatedly. Again, it's not much of a challenge for me, and I'm not at the club to be someone's sparring partner without benefit to me -- I'm there to have fun. And the mostly know and respect that in the same way I respect the folks who are above me in strength. 

And then there are the folks right in my rating range, we tend to play each other a lot. 

And all of this happens without anyone assigning "cowardice" to anyone else. There's no need for it. 

Frankly, I've never met the "Bob" in your example. Rather, I've met other folks who enjoy chess and other people enough to become members of a club. 

Now according to you, I'm 'severely character flawed' in reaching that conclusion. Is any of this sinking in now, or are you still 'Data' from Star Trek?

Checkmate again by the way.

 I don't know about severely character flawed, but you certainly seem to be spending an amazing amount of emotional energy in judging others, and then being upset about the content of your judgement. And honestly, i have no idea how you can get through life like that.