People who don't resign

ur nuber 76 and 75

Hello.

When or if your opponents resign is none of your business. 

That is all.

*insert clip of @lightning hanging his queen for 3 moves in a row-*

+1 though some have trouble accepting this

Yet do Super GMs do the same? Not really, when they see they have chances they play on...

Rating obviously doesn't matter to them as they will take a draw in a drawn position unlike many people.

Blitz, so sweet of you to question my mental health. What an absolute charmer you are!

#86 there doesn't need to be a justification for not resigning. A game is played until it ends. Someone trying to insist their opponent resigns, that needs justifying, would be much more sporting to just complete the game as intended.

this should be written at the first page of chess.com by golden letters
it's unbelievable how some people are able to claim something else

Please explain to me, how one does not resign in this position, when both players still have 3+ min left? It's not as if time's going to run out before black's mated, or black is going to promote any pawns.

Edit:
Again:

You give them ample opportunity to do the honourable thing and resign. Do they take it? No. Rumour has it they're still pushing that king around somewhere...
I really don't understand why it's so hard to accept defeat.

well.. if your opponent is very low rated you can desperately hoping in stalemate... but it s kinda similar as chances that their internet just break down... its possible, very unlikely and its not something what i would be proud of it if it really happened..
So yeah i would instantly resign.. thoough i can imagine that some absolute beginers could learn something even from desparate positions like this..

Maybe they're just curious about how it's going to finish.

In that position white should be thinking 'how do I quickly get checkmate?' not 'boo hoo why haven't they resigned'

I have a game where it was apparent I will win with 3 pawn, 1 bishop, 1 queen and 1 promotion on the way to my opponents King. 

It's a 3 day per turn. He will take 3 days or close to it each turn and won't resign. What's upsetting is not that we will likely play until I checkmate him, but he takes days to make each move. Before he "knew" the fame was lost cause at least we made few moves per hour. I think some players hope they will get a win by having their opponent simply give up playing , thus turning their lost game into a win by hoping their opponent abandons the game. 

In that position white might actually become quite sadistic. Sadly enough they'll probably see it as being incapable of mating, rather than returning the favour of wasting time. So no lessons learned there.

But I'm not curious about what I think, or should think, I'm curious about what they are thinking. If there's less than a minute on the clock, of if t hey have a clear time advantage, yes, by all means finish the game. There's always a chance of flagging or stalemate. But with more than 3 minutes (second game I added in the edit there was about 4 minutes left I think) no one's going to flag and one has the time to think through their moves so that they don't stalemate.
I just don't get why it's so hard to accept the loss and move on.

Just played a game where my opponent didn't play a single move when I had a simple mate in 2. Honestly wastes both our times.  

When and if your opponent resigns is none of your business in most cases. 

Can you pls stop complaining and just win the position if its so winning? Its so annoying seeing players complaining about their opponent not resigning, like dude your opponent HAS the right to play on. And if you don't like that it then maybe chess isn't for you.