is bullet chess "silly"

Well, I agree that measuring rating should be done separately, since rating should be a measure of your strength AT a specific time control.

For the rules of chess, at least how FIDE defines them (so pretty much universally accepted):
http://www.fide.com/component/handbook/?id=124&view=article

EDIT: Articles 1 - 5 are pretty much the rules for are you playing chess? i.e. even in the park without a clock. I would say these are what make bullet chess real chess, and not something else.
After that, FIDE specific competition articles are detailed... note a lot do not even apply online for ANY time control (touch move, pressing clocks, calling flag-falls etc.) since FIDE is almost entirely concerned with OTB competitive play, and has had almost nothing at all to say about online chess.

In reading the Rules of Chess, I noticed something curiously interesting

Article 5: The completion of the game

Notice that there is no stipulation given for losing on time in Chess itself.

However, time control does come into play in Competitve Chess

COMPETITION RULES

Article 6: The chess clock

(etc.)

So, I'm not going to draw any conclusions other than to point out that Time Control does not seem to be an integral element of chess, but rather an integral part of official or sanctioned competition.  How this relates to the debate at hand is up for grabs.

Again, someone (the bullet proponents) is trying to have it both ways. You can't have it both that time controls are part of the rules of chess and that they are irrelevant to it.  If they are irrelevant, then surely bullet has assigned crucial importance to an irrelevant aspect of the game.

This is getting a bit old, what exactly is so silly about this thread ? What would be a not silly thread, another one on how to become a GM in 3 months or something like that ? Or another thread that asks amateurs and beginners to guess who would win between Fischer and Kasparov, or is 1. e4 better than 1.d4 or... you name it.

Who is trying to have it both ways? I have said all along that bullet chess is chess because it follows the same rules as chess, regardless of the time on the clock is. I have even said assigning some time control to when chess becomes "real" chess is pointless and logically unsound.

I think, however, we can minimally ALL agree that zero second chess cannot be chess, since you cannot make any moves at all to show that you are playing chess :)

You have seen Judit Polgar play a game on 20 seconds, which you assumed was chess. Doesn't prove anything.

As to "basic rules". A game may follow the basic rules of chess but introduce additional rules that make it a different game. Chess boxing is a pertinent example. The game as played on the board follows the basic rules of chess, but if one side gets knocked out off the board this will decide the outcome of the chess game as well. Surely such additional rules change the character of the game sufficiently to make it a different game from chess.

I think that you just need to read my post, that is all. Your constant use of red herrings is rather tiresome.

Didn't you yourself point out some time ago, when someone posted a GM game in Anderssen opening, that it was a blitz game ?

The less time one has to think in a game of chess the more prone to blunders they are..... I dont believe anyone would deny this, its very logical. I disagree that bullet and blitz chess follow all the same rules, they do NOT in fact so I tend to see them both as variants of chess ( classic/slow ) chess and not what I would consider "real chess " . 

Yes, absolutely correct, if a KO can change the result of a game then chess-boxing is not chess, and at best a variant. There are NO such extraneous rules for bullet chess - it is as much chess as any other time control - no special extra rules have been added.

I am not sure why the bullet proponents have to insist that it is really chess. I play bullet myself (oh I play 2 1, is that bullet ?), I just don't think that it is real chess. I also like 960 but I don't argue that it's chess.

Which fundamental rules of chess do they not follow?

Sure, we have discussed the blunder-prone issue with regards to bullet in many different ways, but to summarize:

1. being less plunder-prone does not make something "more real" chess. Correspondence is not any more real chess than a standard OTB time-control.
2. blunder-prone is a matter of the individuals involved at what time control - a GM may not blunder at all at blitz, but a 1600 may blunder all over the show even if given 3 hours to think. So any hard rules on what time control is definitively more real chess based on this seems silly. 

We insist that it is real chess because you have not provided any factual evidence to the contrary. Our position is simple: it is a game played by the same rules as other time-controlled chess, thus is as much real chess as any other time control. On what basis can you suggest otherwise?

In blitz chess if you make an illegal move you lose IF your opponent catches the illegal move and this is not the case in "real" chess. There is also the rules concerning drawn games..... try claiming a draw by the 50 move rule in a bullet or blitz game, for example..... 

What would count as "factual evidence" here ? No, I haven't provided factual evidence, I have provided arguments.

Ok, well we have FIDE rules for what the basic rules of chess are - do you see any of those that bullet does not follow?

Well, I am sorry to have to bring this up, but I don't see premoves mentioned anywhere in there. Bullet game as played on the Internet is enabled by the use of premoves and computer interface, and even of Internet lag.

These are more practical nuances - some TDs even stop clock and add time to the opponent's clock. Yes, it is a practical reality that you cannot notate during high speed chess, for example - but this does not change the fact that real chess is being played. Hard to claim a 50 move rule draw without notation !(which is why nearly all online servers track this for you)

FIDE does have rules that differ when you are under 5 minutes in standard chess - again just for practical limitations - you are not suddenly playing "unreal" chess because you entered a time-scramble! Chess is chess whether you making a move in 1 second or under 5 minutes IF you are following the fundamental laws of chess. Competitive and practical tweaks or additions to the rules do not change the fundamentals.

Premoves are a product of ONLINE chess, not of bullet chess per se. In other words, premoves may be used in bullet, but they don't define bullet (the time-control used defines bullet). You could quite easily not use premove in bullet, blitz or in longer games - your call. Your point could be, as someone stated before, that all online chess is a variant of chess because of the existence of things such as premoves or no touch move or not having to press your own clock etc. - but for the sake of at least keeping this within the scope of chess on chess.com, what fundamental rules of chess does bullet not follow? (Excluding any that all online chess time-controls are in breach of)