Should stalemating count as 3/4ths of a win?

EE I don't think anyone can make 50 moves in 1 second.
Nobody.
So I'm thinking you meant something else when you said 'hold the position'.
You could hold it - if there's an 'increment' - or a 'delay'.
If that's what you meant.
And I guess that's what ThrillerFan was referring to when he mentioned 'analog clock'.
If all the tournaments nowadays use an increment then analog clocks shouldn't even be allowed?
Well I guess a lot of players still have them.
An entry fee is an entry fee in other words.

What if the mate can mostly be forced but requires that black has to blunder a king move once or twice. Where do you draw the line? All moves forced or all help-mates. Or somewhere in between. What about Grey area positions?

The rules seem to be comprehensive.
They tend to cover the material situation rather than the position.
Whether its FIDE or USCF or chess.com.
If they didn't it would put an awful lot of pressure on tournament directors and administrators. And players.
Players don't want a million rules.
Adds up to the reasonings for why they do it the way they do.

nah

Yes but this site implements a worse version of USCF that doesn't make exceptions for forced mated. It uses neither system.

That would be because its a computerized online site.
My guess would be the other chess online sites do similiar.
But I don't know. Maybe they do like FIDE or USCF.

But the easiest computerized system to implement would be FIDE, since only 3 or 4 piece combinations are insufficient material for only one side. Those could easily be automatically detected instead of having to input all these parameters like "KBKN if nate can be forced" vs "2 knights vs pawn unforcible mate"..etc. Even for efficiency purposes with live chess FIDE makes more sense??

Any plan with a computerized site that refers to positional details instead of material to decide flag-down situations - is probably doomed to impractibility.
If your mating your opponent but your flag falls before you can set your piece down - it won't let you make that move.
In a live tournament if your opponent yells 'Flag!!' before you set the piece down - then the mate position on the board is supposed to decide.
I'm confident there's been many fights.
I'm confident the player yelling 'flag' has on occasion reset the piece back and its even come to blows ...

Well that's just the nature of online chess. The move may not reach the server in time. I lost this game due to accidentally refreshing at 4 seconds left:

https://www.chess.com/analysis/game/live/98857443101?tab=review

And I'm not complaining, as it was well deserved as I missed countless mates in 2s while still having 10+ seconds left, wasn't thinking straight that day, but if I lose this game, my opponent shouldn't be able to then get a draw out of this by simply not moving:

"And I'm not complaining, but if I lose this game, my opponent shouldn't be able to then get a draw out of this by simply not moving:" Now I see white moving a7. Black would have c8 to b6 #.

If it is black's turn, I see a stalemate.

But that wouldn't take into account blocked positions or positions where the only legal moves lead to a stalemate or to a checkmate against the unflagged player. Those positions would still require some processing power to correctly rule a draw under FIDE or USCF.

A "mostly forced" mate is NOT a forced mate. A mate is only forced if EVERY possible defense can still be mated. For instance K+Q vs K that doesn't start with a stalemate is a forced mate. White Ke4, Pe2 versus Black Ke6 is a forced mate regardless of whose move it is. White Kf6, Pe6 versus Black Kf8 is a forced mate with Black to move but not a forced mate with White to move. And getting back to an earlier example Whit Ke1, Bc1 versus Black Kh8, Ph7, Bg8 Pc4 is a forced mate only if White is on the move because Bb2+ c3 (only legal move), Bxc3 is checkmate. If it is Black to move then after Kg7 there is no forced mate against Black.

The rule in both FIDE and USCF is that if a flag is called before the mating move is determined then the mate did not happen during the game. In FIDE the arbiter can, and should, call the flag the moment it occurs even if a mate would occur a split second later, so an online site mimics that. In USCF the TD/arbiter does not call flags (unless both are down).

In both, the TD/arbiter should (if possible) be watching such time trouble games to see whether a mate occurred before or after a flag occurs (FIDE) or a flag is called (USCF). If possible is stated because sometimes the number of time trouble games outnumbers the number of available TDs/arbiters and not every such game will be watched.

I have proposed dead position detection algorithms be incorporated as well, (have a thread on that as well).

Almost certain he is talking White to move.

In the position he gives, White's only legal move is 1.a7, and then Black mates with 1...Nb6#, but the way chess.com is set up, if White simply stalls and let's his clock run out, chess.com scores it a draw when it should be a win for Black. If Black's flag falls, it scores as a win for White because Black is not obligated to take the pawn or play Nb6. He could play 1...Kd8, allowing 2.Kb8, and then say, 2...Nd6 and 3.a8(Q) and the White wins.

That's the point.
A lot of games are ending.
In a big playing hall. And/or - a lot is going on.
The TD/arbiter usually isn't going to be at the game.
They may even make it a point to not be.
I've even heard at least one TD say
'don't call a TD or staff over to your game'
the point: that option gets abused.
-------------------------------------------------
I also heard a terrible cheating story.
A friend was in good shape on the board - had a significant advantage.
But - he also had a Big advantage on the clock.
So what does the cheater do?
He blatantly - in front of everyone close - reaches over to the clock and gives himself an extra half hour. Turning his clock back.
The TD is called over.
Cheater: 'didn't turn the clock back'
Witnesses: 'Yes you did.'
Cheater: 'This guy's got his friends here to say any old thing.'
TD director: Doesn't do anything.
The cheater got the extra half hour and wins the game.
--------------------------------
Problem: No camera footage available.
That kind of thing can happen.
-----------------------------------------
Tennis: Ken Rosewall is beating Ilie Nastase. 'Nasty'.
Nastase suddenly stops playing. Talks. Takes a break.
The official doesn't default Nastase.
In theory Rosewall could have walked away and claimed a win.
Nastase ended up getting a big psychological advantage and won the match.
'Wrong' can win.

The director was a moron! Even if it was an analog clock with a 2 hour time control, the clocks are set to 4 o'clock. If the round started at 6pm, and it is 8:45, while not exact to the second, the clocks should add up to about 75 minutes.

If digital, let's say with 30 second increment. If the director sees 36 moves made by each player, that is 4 hours 36 minutes (18 minutes gained by each player. Again, it is 845pm. Remaining time should add up to 111 minutes, not 171 minutes.

@ThrillerFan
Of course! I realized immediately at the time of hearing the story decades ago that the total time left on the clocks wouldn't be consistent with the starting time of that day's tournament round.
Yes. The TD had some kind of brain freeze ... and decided he would not do anything.
------------------------------------------
But this is representative of much larger situations.
When you play in a chess tournament - you are in the domain of tournament
officials.
When you are a member of a chess club here - you are in the domain of that's clubs owner.
When you are on this site - you are in the domain of one man - the site owner.

its draw