This site has a bunch of members that don't rematch.

I always grant at least a single rematch when requested to do so, except when my opponent has clearly engaged in poor sportsmanship. Doing so is simply good manners and good sportsmanship. It is uncommon around the world to offhandedly decline a rematch request in casual OTB blitz play. Those who do so are often shunned as the boors they are. I see no reason why behavior in online play should be different to that in OTB play.

they‘re free to do so

People are free to do all kinds of thing generally considered improper. Do you mean that it is perfectly fine behavior to shun a rematch request in casual OTB blitz?

Casual OTB blitz is unrated, blitz here is usually rated, that's the difference.

In rated OTB play rematches simply don't exist. I see no reason why there should be a pressure to accept them online.

Lighten up, man.  Move on the next one.

When I still played 10min games, I regularly had the request for rematches. And often I accepted and smiled. Why? If you won the first game (yes, normaly the looser are asking for rematches), it is a bit more than possible to win the second game also. And I think it worked in maybe 70% of the games. Some of my opponents asked me over and over for rematches, till I was exhausted (or bored) of winning games

But my opinion is, that it is everybodys right to accept or refuse rematches. And no one has the right to opprobriate people who desides not to accept rematches. THAT is bad behaviour, Mr. OP!

Sometimes after an interesting game I want to analyze it and decline a rematch. You are not entitled to one.

You make a good point that blitz games here are rated (amost always) unlike casual games OTB. I will admit that no onus should fall on a player who so deeply prizes his or her chess.com rating that he or she declines a rematch request from, for instance, a defeated but much stonger player. Perhaps I don't take my rating seriously enough and I am also coddling wimps. Nevertheless, I will continue to always grant at least one rematch and view those who never do as lacking in fellow-feeling.

It has nothing to do with prizing my chess.com rating, because there is no guarantee that I will not lose it against next random opponent.

But I do take my rated games seriously which means:

1. I want to analyze right after the game

2. I am stressed and need a break

And finally playing different opponents is much more fun for me than playing the same one.

I totally agree but there should be some other option rather than a mandatory 1 game rematch

I infer that you choose to never rematch for the three reasons you have stated. I am sorry to hear your nerves prevent you from playing games back-to-back. I trust that your games are improving with analysis after each one. And if you never face the same opponent repeatedly, in a match or during club play, there is nothing to be gained from developing the skill to analze a player's style and weaknesses.

You are right, I never analyze player's style and weaknesses. They do it at GM level but I don't see what's the point to do it at my 1770 OTB. I might never play the same guy again, or might play him in 1 year forgetting anything I knew about him. I feel that just studying and playing normally is much more beneficial than concentrating on just one opponent.

dude why the heck are u reviving this 4 year thread, and he already said hes over with it 

That should be pretty obvious. I've played games where something else comes up, maybe near the end of a game. I'll play out the game and then walk away to do something more important. There have been times a rematch was given to me and I didn't even know it. I wasn't there. 

How are we supposed to know who you are referring to, dude?

And your point is that White should be granted a rematch after that disaster?

Makes me wonder if the KC Chiefs are whining for a rematch too.