people who concede when losing

[AKuras]

For me its rude when opo doesn't concede when its clear that some one already won 100%. Even if its at 50% or at 99%. Those last turns can take time and there's no point in me sitting and looking pixles move. I'm not interested to see how bad I lost. 100 points or 300. No dif still lost. I rather start a new game then sit and wait for nothing.
I see some arguments for waiting. I understand them. But you are wrong. My time is infinitely more valuable then u seeing final score.

[FrankJones]

For me its rude when opo doesn't concede when its clear that some one already won 100%. Even if its at 50% or at 99%. Those last turns can take time and there's no point in me sitting and looking pixles move. I'm not interested to see how bad I lost. 100 points or 300. No dif still lost. I rather start a new game then sit and wait for nothing.
I see some arguments for waiting. I understand them. But you are wrong. My time is infinitely more valuable then u seeing final score.

I'm "wrong" on a subjective matter of opinion? That's an interesting take.

I am referring to situations in which it would take less than one minute to actually complete the game, or even situations where the losing player does not even need to make another move, and taking the time to press concede actually takes MORE time than just letting the game end.

But, sure, yeah, your 30 seconds is more important than playing the game to completion so that the other player can see the score and end-game state. Nothing selfish about that. Sounds perfectly sportsmanlike.

By this twisted logic, a person would be correct to cut in line, cut people off while driving, and do any number of other rude or inconsiderate things because "their time is worth more than [whatever].

[AKuras]

For me its rude when opo doesn't concede when its clear that some one already won 100%. Even if its at 50% or at 99%. Those last turns can take time and there's no point in me sitting and looking pixles move. I'm not interested to see how bad I lost. 100 points or 300. No dif still lost. I rather start a new game then sit and wait for nothing.
I see some arguments for waiting. I understand them. But you are wrong. My time is infinitely more valuable then u seeing final score.

I'm "wrong" on a subjective matter of opinion? That's an interesting take.

I am referring to situations in which it would take less than one minute to actually complete the game, or even situations where the losing player does not even need to make another move, and taking the time to press concede actually takes MORE time than just letting the game end.

But, sure, yeah, your 30 seconds is more important than playing the game to completion so that the other player can see the score and end-game state. Nothing selfish about that. Sounds perfectly sportsmanlike.

By this twisted logic, a person would be correct to cut in line, cut people off while driving, and do any number of other rude or inconsiderate things because "their time is worth more than [whatever].

yes even 1 minute is worth conceding. in that minute i rather set up a new game.
Your last egz is wrong. because cuting in line, cuting people off while driving is illegal in most instances. Conceding before a person does his final move isnt.

[FrankJones]

For me its rude when opo doesn't concede when its clear that some one already won 100%. Even if its at 50% or at 99%. Those last turns can take time and there's no point in me sitting and looking pixles move. I'm not interested to see how bad I lost. 100 points or 300. No dif still lost. I rather start a new game then sit and wait for nothing.
I see some arguments for waiting. I understand them. But you are wrong. My time is infinitely more valuable then u seeing final score.

I'm "wrong" on a subjective matter of opinion? That's an interesting take.

I am referring to situations in which it would take less than one minute to actually complete the game, or even situations where the losing player does not even need to make another move, and taking the time to press concede actually takes MORE time than just letting the game end.

But, sure, yeah, your 30 seconds is more important than playing the game to completion so that the other player can see the score and end-game state. Nothing selfish about that. Sounds perfectly sportsmanlike.

By this twisted logic, a person would be correct to cut in line, cut people off while driving, and do any number of other rude or inconsiderate things because "their time is worth more than [whatever].

yes even 1 minute is worth conceding. in that minute i rather set up a new game.
Your last egz is wrong. because cuting in line, cuting people off while driving is illegal in most instances. Conceding before a person does his final move isnt.

Oh, I see.

So legal = Considerate and illegal = inconsiderate?

Gotcha. Thanks for correcting the error of my ways.

Besides...

Are you usure cutting in line is illegal? I have not heard of people with criminal records for this.

[AngelaVC]

I think there are four different categories here. There is personal culture around conceding when losing (and how it feels when you are the winner in that case), there is culture for specific games -- like go or chess--in which accepted/preferred to concede when you know you are going to lose, and there's culture specifically of BGA which might be different for turn-based vs real-time! Something like this table....

[Meeplelowda]

Oh, I see.

So legal = Considerate and illegal = inconsiderate?

Gotcha. Thanks for correcting the error of my ways.

Besides...

Are you usure cutting in line is illegal? I have not heard of people with criminal records for this.

Just as there are things that are unethical but perfectly legal, there are things that are unsportsmanlike despite being compliant with rules. Some people don't recognize (or pretend not to recognize) any difference. For example, many places have laws about lost or mislaid property. The nuances vary by location, but the basic principle is that after a certain amount of time if the true owner doesn't return to claim it, whoever found it, or the owner of the place where it was left, can keep it. If you happen to see your friend's treasured pocket watch handed down to him by his dearly departed father in a lost and found, it may be perfectly legal to go back after the waiting period and tell the owner you would like to have it without ever mentioning it to your "friend." But depending on your personal compass, that could be viewed as unethical or immoral.

This is of course a contrived example that could be made more or less extreme by tweaking the details. But the basic question is do you want to live in a world where everyone takes advantage of everything they can do legally or according to "the rules"? You won't be able to sway someone for whom the answer to that question is "yes."

[FrankJones]

Agreed - and that's unfortunate. It's very clear how deeply entrenched selfish people are in their beliefs that their selfishness is justified. Fortunately, at least in my experience, most people have some sense of consideration for others rather than saying this like, "one minute of my life is more important than [literally anything that has to do with anyone else]".

The other piece of good news is that most people like that generally tend to congregate, since most considerate people will find such people intolerable to be around.

If a friend of mine wasted an hour of my time because one minute of his time was more important, I would not be friends with that person anymore.

The internet gives us many great things, such as Board Game Arena, but it also means people end up interacting with people they would never associate with in person in "real life."

[nik592]

The other point, especially when players are not as familiar with a game, is that it's not always obvious to all players who has won a game at a given point. For games that are not fully scored until the end, I don't tend to sit and look at the board and calculate up everyone's final scores (this is part of why I enjoy playing on BGA, because I don't have to), and there have been plenty of times when my gut feel says that Player A will surely win, only to see Player B scrape a victory. Or to think I'm fully out of the game, only to find the margins were quite tight (and yes, I still lost, but not by as much as I thought). I like to see those things play out.

I also agree that when learning a game, it is useful to see what the decisions you made through the game led to - even beyond things like farmer placement in Carcassonne, but something like, did I stop building my engine at the right point and pivot to gaining victory points (in a game that has that kind of mechanic)? And honestly, I'm still "learning" a lot of games. I like to play a diverse range, I don't seek expert knowledge in anything really (at least, not the kind that comes by playing 1000 games of one thing and very little of anything else). But that's my subjective opinion.

I don't think a Person can reasonably expect their opponent to concede or not concede based on that Person's own opinion on the matter. I don't like it when people concede (mostly) but if my reasons for that don't resonate with someone else and they want to concede? Well, ok. In some cases, I might red thumb that person because clearly our play styles are not compatible. But I do accept that there's a wide range of opinions out there about when conceding is appropriate, and mine is not the one true way. Much like opinions on greetings, good game wishes, chatting, etc. Many perspectives. If they're not insulting you directly, they're probably not meaning offense, they're probably just doing their own thing.

[Suoivax]

Agreed - and that's unfortunate. It's very clear how deeply entrenched selfish people are in their beliefs that their selfishness is justified. Fortunately, at least in my experience, most people have some sense of consideration for others rather than saying this like, "one minute of my life is more important than [literally anything that has to do with anyone else]".

so its not selfish that you want to force me to sit through your ego-stroke to know exactly how badly you beat me?

[FrankJones]

Agreed - and that's unfortunate. It's very clear how deeply entrenched selfish people are in their beliefs that their selfishness is justified. Fortunately, at least in my experience, most people have some sense of consideration for others rather than saying this like, "one minute of my life is more important than [literally anything that has to do with anyone else]".

so its not selfish that you want to force me to sit through your ego-stroke to know exactly how badly you beat me?

No, it is not, not in the examples I gave.

One of the items mentioned in the BGA guidelines is that players are expected to play the game to completion. That is a reasonable expectation.
If the game is a couple minutes (or less) away from ending, and requires one turn or less, the arguments for conceding instead of playing it out are very weak.

"...to sit through your ego-stroke to know exactly how badly you beat me"

You obviously did not read any of my posts, because I gave numerous reasons to a person might wan to be able to see the end-game state, and you ignored them all and invented something I never said just to attribute some pettiness to my own explanation where none exists. Re-read my posts if you care to actually see what I wrote.