Chess players are an angry demographic.

@zuckertort2 said:

"I played in a tournament today and was up a knight and a pawn in a game. My opponent gave his queen away for nothing and then claimed in the tournament chatroom it was a mouse-slip. believe it or not 1 sec later he offered a draw."

This is a reply to SOME post but not to mine. A knight and a pawn is far below being down 10 units of power as I stated in my original post. I'm getting sick of replying to my respondents because they either: a) Can't read, and/or b) Are responding to a post I didn't make.

Patzers play on where a good player would resign.

@Sariel_A said:

"In debate class, refusal to concede to the stronger side resulted in the loss of a "rep. point" which essentially meant you cared more about being right than about truth and accuracy. A loss of 3 rep. points meant you could no longer participate in debates and did essays for the rest of the semester."

Finally, a poster who gets it. In the case of a chess "debate" where one side is way more than dead lost, they're way more concerned about their "right" to play until mate than in being a good guy. Such players don't know the difference between freedom and LICENSE. I'm finding out over time that few players on this site can even READ an argument so they respond to points that their rhetorical adversary didn't even make. Thanks for being a beacon of light in a thread that has become chaotic because my rhetorical opponents in this thread either can't read or make an elementary deduction.

@Eleuthero Yes, there is a huge fountain of anger in chess. For many people it is a way to express rage and frustration, and latent aggression. It is way bigger than the particular issue you are complaining about. Look at the number of player names, handles, that express malice or some urge to hurt or humiliate an opponent.
By the way, I hope you see that your complaints and posts are also an expression of ANGER (as you might type) at the whole chess community as well as the "die-harders" or somehow mentally defective players.
The unfortunate truth is that a player has a right to be checkmated.
It often frustrates me, too, but no amount of bitching about what is gentlemanly or respectful to the game can change the rule. A player is never required to resign, and many of the churls that play now just aren't going to do it.
So, accept it, or quit playing. Going on a rant will not change their behavior.

@Eleuthero
i don't know why, but reading "i'm a gentleman" makes me think the opposite. i know it's illogical and stuff, but still.

I think there's a bias where I use my own thoughts about the world and apply it to say "Players are ANGRY and want to impose their error on YOU". Like, if they made a horrible error, in my world I would be angry at myself*. That's my bias. It's not a personal attack**. But it's your world I guess.

"rise to the general feeling in public that chess players are poorly socialized dweebs". What? I never seen...
Well I admit maybe there are people who say that, but aren't those people usually regarded*** as YouTube comment trolls or people who are ______****.

"either one or both of them won't look at them in the eye". Actually, I haven't. Is the public really against us? I have a huge

"chess is marvelous... " yes. soo amazing. unbelievably.

______________________________________
"My GOD, can't people READ or do ARITHMETIC?"
Are you okay? I know some people are horrible but drink some water or eat ice cream or something.
Sorry I was annoyed****** too. So I wrote this long comment. Your point stands though.

I think people have already debated a lot about resigning (and also draws, en passant, etc.*****), generally don't be too miffed about your bad position, end the game when it makes sense. But "chess players are an angry demographic"....

"Lack of ability to make logical responses"
"there's a better way"

* No I wouldn't, but maybe I would if I was in the lowest mood of the month.
** I wouldn't know though. I don't play on unless it's time pressure. Which is 90% of my games, I mostly do ultrabullet and bullet*******
*** my bias again. sorry if i offend anyone
**** I don't know what people actually think of other people that are like this. Generally negative
***** The "etc." means I can't think of anymore things at the top of my head, but I bet there's more.
****** Was I angry? I think the text under the horizontal line should be taken slightly less seriously. Also my own words in quotation marks
******* I know, I know. (Wait, rereading this, maybe I don't [though I <em> have <em> done longer games and even a real life chess set])

i spent way too long on this

Edit: Oh. I spent so long a better comment than mine (sparowe14) wasn't shown.

@StevenEmily said:

"I think there's a bias where I use my own thoughts about the world and apply it to say "Players are ANGRY and want to impose their error on YOU". Like, if they made a horrible error, in my world I would be angry at myself*. That's my bias. It's not a personal attack**. But it's your world I guess."

Chess players are a really socially inept and ungentlemanly demographic. Look at the pics before and after a super-GM match. One or both players shake hands without looking their opponent in the eye. It's not "my world". This is called EVIDENCE. Whether a blunder evokes self-anger or anger at an opponent is of little interest to me. The proverbial "bottom line" is that whether it's self anger or anger at the opponent they're wasting my time and almost always THEIR time as well.

I'm narcissistic enough to think I'm different and do you know WHY? Because I am!! I own no chess books and don't even own a chess set or clock. The game is just recreation to me and I quit it from age 35 to 66 because, though I've always loved the game, I've never been partial to the players, sweeping with a broad brush. My ego investment in the game is minimal and that's why I resign when I blunder unless, as I said in the OP, there's evident compensation.

Love the game, do NOT love the players.

ah that makes sense.

don't have anything to say i guess

@StevenEmily you wasted five minutes of your life writing that comment. you could have played five or more bullet games during that time. regarding your original comment: I was a lawyer for 30 years. If a witness starts an answer with "Well, I'll tell you the truth ... " it is a sure sign that what he says next will be a lie.
If a lawyer says to the judge, "With all due respect .... " it conveys a total lack of respect.
If someone has to tell you he is a gentleman, ....
If someone complains about other people being angry ...
Low ego investment leads to rage and rant.
Or, as I like to say "You're unique, just like everyone else."

@sparowe14

Nice reply but ... I really think that if forums on Lichess are going to be enjoyable, some people ought to have the nerve to be controversial. If there's no controversy then what are we talking about? Puppie dogs, Mom, and apple pie? Worse, most of the responses are non sequiturs whose genesis is lack of reading comprehension. Yeah, it's that bad.