Win Quitters/Etiquette

I would like to clarify. You're saying, out of these two scenarios:

1) getting upset after a loss and complaining publicly about it, including calling your opponents "douche" and questioning the value of their lives

2) not playing chess against people you don't want to play chess against anymore

... number one is good etiquette, and number two is bad etiquette?

@elblandie
I do accept takebacks on obvious mouseslips and I do both offer and accept rematches from time to time. The point is that I am not offended in any way if the opponent doesn't do either of those things.

If you think this is about rating, you are really mistaken. If player A wins against player B and then player B offers a rematch, accepting the offer has a *higher* expected value for player A than queuing again to play against the next random guy with about the same rating (since player A now has already proved once that he can win against B).

Rematch offers are offers.
Offers mean that you shift the power of decision to the other party. That is polite.
If you do not accept their decision, was your offer really honest? Was it really polite?
Who's the douche?
The one who answered truly when asked for their opinion, or the one who only wanted to hear one answer?

I think that many people dont accept rematch offer because they haven't time for play in real life. Some decline it because they afraid they will loose that game. Some because they found their opponent unfair player.
In my opinion accepting rematch offer is sportish and ok. I always do so. If some opponent is very interesting to me, im playing with him more then 2 matches. :)

It is not compulsory to accept a rematch.

@Karla-Sio Of course that happens and that's absolutely fine. It's when you get those people who rush off, immediately find a new opponent... it's just bad etiquette, plain and simple.

As for those arguing that an offer of a rematch is just as galling as doing the above, it pretty much proves my point, which online chess makes people act in ways I'd hope they didn't in person i.e., like douches.

@FatesWarning - of course it isn't; see my comments in Karla just now.

@elblandie
You don't even try to read posts that disagree with your opinion, do you?

Rematch offers are absolutely fine by more or less everyone here (well, everyone except HumanCentipawn).
The actual thing that isn't widely accepted are moralising complaints that people who dare to refuse rematch offers are all "douches". ;)

Talking insistently to people and persuading them of things they were not aware of and which they don't want possibly - that's bad etiquette indeed.

Where does this rematch quirk come from? You agreed to play one game with your opponent. Full stop.

Do you see the point? It's not a comma though.

This bothers you that much? What bothers me is players who refuse a 100% draw (opposite colour bishops, one pawn left on the board) because they have 25 seconds left on the clock, while you have 20. Then it's not chess anymore.

Or players who just let their clock run out when they are dead lost. Is it so difficult to hit resign and get on with it? No, they have to be 100% douchebags all the way to the finish line.

THAT is two examples of bad etiquette. Not playing 2-3 games in a row with the same player isn't a problem, you will surely face them again some other time.

Sometimes I play several games against the same opponent, sometimes I don't. Sometimes they play boring chess, sometimes I only have time for one game at a time, etc.

@ProfDrHack I do read the comments but then again you're so insistent on you being right that I am spend my energy engaging with those who might be persuaded one way or the other.

@Sir_Pinsalot Honestly, no. But you do understand the difference between one person being frustrated and a whole group of players being so hung up on earning points that the social/challenge part of chess has been eroded, right? Edit: by the way, totally agree with your example - some might say that's flagging, part of online chess, etc... I think that's just a weak argument and it's poor etiquette, 100%.