Winner dragging out a game to be cruel

RIP to the ChessBrah's account, then!

This whole thing seems to be much ado about nothing because whatever side you're on and whatever's bothering you, there's an easy solution as long as you understand that compromise is a thing.

IF you don't resign because you want to learn something, that's fine - but you need to understand that not every opponent will understand that's what your motivation is and may troll you. When the trolling starts, you can resign. If you're not resigning because you think you have a chance of nicking a result, that's also fine, but you have no right to complain when your opponent starts playing in a manner that clearly conveys they know they've won. Oh, and no, you shouldn't report your opponent just because they're dragging it out. You accepted that they might do that when you made the decision not to resign.

Conversely, if you're on the winning side, you are not entitled to a resignation! Chess.com does remind us of this in their FAQs. Your opponent is not necessarily being disrespectful, and even if you think they are, you're about to win, so what do you care? I rarely get impatient with my opponent when they don't resign because 99% of the time, when my opponent is losing they'll resign - which means the opportunity to put mate on the board (against human opponents) is rare. If I get to the above position (as White), my opponent will almost always resign. Most of the rest of the time, I'd promote to a Queen and test my accuracy. There is the odd occasion I might underpromote to a knight. I don't think this is being disrespectful - this is a checkmate that needs to be practiced every so often and the opportunity to do it to a human opponent in an actual game is rare. There is an element of being assertive, but not an unreasonable one. Conversely, my opponent has a choice. They can think: "OK, he's got this" and resign, or they can think: "I'd actually like to see this" and play on. It doesn't matter if they're actually arrogant enough to think they can get stalemate or last 50 moves - I'll beat them just the same, so I might as well assume they just want a free lesson. If I'm being really picky, I'll say that when I underpromote to a knight, my opponent should decide there and then whether they resign on the spot, or let me play it out to checkmate. Don't be a you-know-what and have us go through the rigmarole of Black King runs for wrong corner, I keep him there as I co-ordinate my pieces into the Mate in 17 position, then embark on the "W" technique - Black King thinks I've messed up and tries to escape for the other wrong corner, only to find out I know what I'm doing - Black King gets boxed in to his final two squares and THEN resign. However, even if my opponent is that disrespectful, I'll frown, think "that's a (you-know-what) move", and then I'll get on with my life and never be bothered by that instance again. If I get THIS position, however:

There was ONE game, in my Junior days, where I had something like this, promoted to a Queen, sacked it, did this two more times and then promoted to a rook with the final pawn. Nowadays, who has time for bleeping around like that? This game is going to be over in 5 moves or less.