I think how serious one is about chess is certainly relevant when it comes to the discussion of what someone finds as unethical/insulting , etc where chess is concerned. Ofcourse the more serious one is about the game the more "picky" they are gonna be about rules/ethics and any wrongs/insults either real or imagined. I think that your dismissing ALL of them as " sore losers" without knowing any of the details of the game/circumstances in which they received a "gg" is simply childish and a bit insulting on your part.
gg is arrogance
Sort:
Jul 17, 2011
0
#483
Reb wrote:
I think that your dismissing ALL of them as " sore losers" without knowing any of the details of the game/circumstances in which they received a "gg" is simply childish and a bit insulting on your part.
All right, a valid point, and also interesting, because my main problem with the anti-gg people is that they assume spiteful intentions on the part of the gg-ers (sp?) without having any real knowledge in most cases whether the intentions were evil or innocuous.
Since they can't know for sure, why do some players get worked up about gg by assuming it was an insult? I think the answer for some of them is that it makes them feel better after their loss if they can find some reason, however tenuous or ridiculous, that allows them to brand the guy who just beat them as a jerk.
Maybe posting here will get rid of the message on my home page which states... "You haven't yet participated. Get involved in the forums, write an article, or post to your blog now!"
And I agree too... chess is a gg!
Cystem_Phailure wrote:
Reb wrote:
I think that your dismissing ALL of them as " sore losers" without knowing any of the details of the game/circumstances in which they received a "gg" is simply childish and a bit insulting on your part.
All right, a valid point, and also interesting, because my main problem with the anti-gg people is that they assume spiteful intentions on the part of the gg-ers (sp?) without having any real knowledge in most cases whether the intentions were evil or innocuous.
Since they can't know for sure, why do some players get worked up about gg by assuming it was an insult? I think the answer for some of them is that it makes them feel better after their loss if they can find some reason, however tenuous or ridiculous, that allows them to brand the guy who just beat them as a jerk.
I agree that some of the people who get upset over "gg" are just sore losers . I recall the game in which Kasparov lost to Radjabov ( 15 at the time of the game ) in the Linares 2003 tournament that Kasparov resigned ( he was completely lost on the board ) by simply storming away and allowing his remaining time to run out. He also would not shake his opponent's hand nor analyse the game with him. I shudder to think what may have happened had Radjabof offered "gg" to Kasparov ! 
Jul 17, 2011
0
#486
Cystem_Phailure wrote:
Reb wrote:
I think that your dismissing ALL of them as " sore losers" without knowing any of the details of the game/circumstances in which they received a "gg" is simply childish and a bit insulting on your part.
All right, a valid point, and also interesting, because my main problem with the anti-gg people is that they assume spiteful intentions on the part of the gg-ers (sp?) without having any real knowledge in most cases whether the intentions were evil or innocuous.
Since they can't know for sure, why do some players get worked up about gg by assuming it was an insult? I think the answer for some of them is that it makes them feel better after their loss if they can find some reason, however tenuous or ridiculous, that allows them to brand the guy who just beat them as a jerk.
Im one of those guys that plays... what I think... is a lot of games and I usually place a "gg" after the game with no evil intentions what so ever. After the game means... after the game... which is after my opponent or I resignes or gives checkmate. Never before. Its like a quick hand shake (goodgame) and then time to move on.
clms_chess wrote:
Cystem_Phailure wrote:
Reb wrote:
I think that your dismissing ALL of them as " sore losers" without knowing any of the details of the game/circumstances in which they received a "gg" is simply childish and a bit insulting on your part.
All right, a valid point, and also interesting, because my main problem with the anti-gg people is that they assume spiteful intentions on the part of the gg-ers (sp?) without having any real knowledge in most cases whether the intentions were evil or innocuous.
Since they can't know for sure, why do some players get worked up about gg by assuming it was an insult? I think the answer for some of them is that it makes them feel better after their loss if they can find some reason, however tenuous or ridiculous, that allows them to brand the guy who just beat them as a jerk.
Im one of those guys that plays... what I think... is a lot of games and I usually place a "gg" after the game with no evil intentions what so ever. After the game means... after the game... which is after my opponent or I resignes or gives checkmate. Never before. Its like a quick hand shake (goodgame) and then time to move on.
You might consider <handshake> instead ? I dont see how anyone could misconstrue that. I sometimes have a series of games on ICC in blitz against the same opponent(s). I sometimes will get "gg" after the games they win but they never say "gg" when they lose. If they cant say gg when they lose then I prefer them to not say it when they win either but I dont go ballistic or anything.
The problem with overanalyzing what "gg" means just serves to prove to me how touchy people have become. "gg" means: good game. Period. Unless you're speaking to someone in person it isn't possible to put voice inflectioin in messages that are typed.
Take it easy folks. "Gg" just means good game; no more and no less.
I think I have said enough. Thanks and have a GG
Well, saying "Good game" is usually good sportsmanship (except apparently against you) and it doesn't seem too arrogant when you get crushed.
I thought it meant good game. I am owning up to that.
AnthonyCG wrote:
Cystem_Phailure wrote:
Reb wrote:
I think that your dismissing ALL of them as " sore losers" without knowing any of the details of the game/circumstances in which they received a "gg" is simply childish and a bit insulting on your part.
All right, a valid point, and also interesting, because my main problem with the anti-gg people is that they assume spiteful intentions on the part of the gg-ers (sp?) without having any real knowledge in most cases whether the intentions were evil or innocuous.
Since they can't know for sure, why do some players get worked up about gg by assuming it was an insult? I think the answer for some of them is that it makes them feel better after their loss if they can find some reason, however tenuous or ridiculous, that allows them to brand the guy who just beat them as a jerk.
Actually it's a horrible point since gg means good game without any consideration of the game. It's the equivalent of a handshake.
I leave it to chess players to overanalyze something so simple...
Then why not just say : <handshake> regardless of the result ? problem solved
AnthonyCG wrote:
Reb wrote:
AnthonyCG wrote:
Cystem_Phailure wrote:
Reb wrote:
I think that your dismissing ALL of them as " sore losers" without knowing any of the details of the game/circumstances in which they received a "gg" is simply childish and a bit insulting on your part.
All right, a valid point, and also interesting, because my main problem with the anti-gg people is that they assume spiteful intentions on the part of the gg-ers (sp?) without having any real knowledge in most cases whether the intentions were evil or innocuous.
Since they can't know for sure, why do some players get worked up about gg by assuming it was an insult? I think the answer for some of them is that it makes them feel better after their loss if they can find some reason, however tenuous or ridiculous, that allows them to brand the guy who just beat them as a jerk.
Actually it's a horrible point since gg means good game without any consideration of the game. It's the equivalent of a handshake.
I leave it to chess players to overanalyze something so simple...
Then why not just say : regardless of the result ? problem solved
handshake = 9 letters
gg = 2 letters
Then abbreviate handshake to hs then ... DUH
I say thanks for letting me win.
Jul 17, 2011
0
#494
Oh no! A whole new can of worms! all-acronyms.com lists 322 suggestions for the abbreviation "hs" , none of them handshake, so you'll have to train people as to what hs means. Otherwise it's just a matter of time before someone complains about some other mis-interpreted meaning-- for instance, the first listing under the modern slang category is head shot or headshot. 
By the way, they list 66 suggestions for "gg", the top one for which is good game.
if i loose and the opponent says good game, then i take that to mean that i played well and the game was enjoyable. which is what its about really.
gg is just two alphabet to type and to enter, i find it not negative depends on the state of mind that receive it means only good gamesand nothing more.
ggmeans good game! How is that arrogant!?
Jul 19, 2011
0
#498
To be honost... if a player drops a Queen to a Knight fork or somethin' in an otherwise tight game and then resigns... I may still say "gg" but temper it with "good luck and smooth sailing in the rest of your games".
Lately if I win and the other player lost by so many blunders and I know he just wasn't into it I don't say gg.....I say ''thx for game'.'
Some people just arent very serious chess players and they will never " get it ". Its useless arguing with them as it is with a box of hammers.
The vast majority of chess players aren't "very serious chess players". But then, whether or not someone is a "very serious chess player" is completely irrelevant to the discussion, either way.
Nice try, though.