@Toscani said in #13:
> Ethical chess players tend to try to win on the merits of their own play. They avoid getting a reputation for rudeness by gracefully winning and losing their games. When a piece is unable to move it lacks mobility. So it's not unethical or rude to checkmate. What is unethical is using assistance, closing the browser without ending the game. It's important to choose time controls you can reasonably manage. Making people wait is considered rude, so wise time management is recommended to reduce stress.
>
> Ranked from most to least ethical:
>
> 1. Resigning by conceding defeat is graceful;
> 2. Mutual agreed draws is useful;
> 3. Three fold repetition is forceful;
> 4. Claiming a draw by rules is when the above 3 are not applied;
> 5. Insufficient material to mate, should hasten an end game;
> 6. Timeout losses or wins are the least satisfying way to end a game.
>
> It's best to practice your skills in casual (unrated games), rather than rated games. This helps you avoid appearing ignorant in competitive matches. Prolonged waits that delays the game because of lack of experience can impact other players and the tournament schedule. Fatiguing your opponents or delaying the next round so you can practice endgames that are clearly lost is inconsiderate to the other players. Try to be mindful of how your actions affect the experience of the entire group.
>
> It's ethical to start and finish games on time. Expect some wait during the middle game, and aim to end games gracefully.
not a single person rated less than 1500 is going to appear ignorant of not resigning a lost position
if for example you are 2400 and you are playing against another, and you are completely lost (no chances whatsoever), i guess it is considered somewhat "ethical" to resign
but seriously. at <1500 blunders will happen, and it certainly should not be considered "ignorant" or "rude" in this case (considering literally every other or 3rd move is a inaccuracy, mistake, or blunder.)