"Letting time run out instead of resigning will result in a temporary ban."

That's a fair point but for that reason, quite a few adjustments have been made over time until even quite recently, especially for bullet where it was way too aggressive. But I think we're now pretty close to the limit where it rarely triggers false positives and still catches most bad behavior.

Letting your time run out for over a minute and then resigning with just a few seconds left on the clock is already clearly quite borderline. Sure, there's no denying this can happen when you blunder in a very complex situation with just the wrong amount of time left but that's certainly not the common case and at the same time the reason you just get a chat warning. It won't have any consequences if this happens to you once in a while so it's not even remotely the same thing as giving somebody a speeding ticket when they weren't even speeding.

The main issue is that some people take the warning as much more than it is. Maybe only showing it when it's the second time in a short while would help but that would again require some system to determine when to send the warning etc.

In the end, this is at most a minor inconvenience.

@benwerner said in #11:
Thanks for the considered response. :) What you said seems to generally be very reasonable but it's what you didn't say that makes me wonder. You didn't ask what time control it was. Letting one minute run out in a 2 minute game is obviously a much much clearer meeting of the threshold for warning than in a rapid game. I'm hoping, and I can't imagine that your system would fail to take that into account.
Now we can see by his profile it's likely a rapid game so that gets to be a lot more debatable. In sharp complex situations I've taken 2-3 minutes often times in in rapid games with absolutely no intention of rage sitting, completely in good faith.
I'd also hope your system takes into account your opponents time. If your opponent's time is near running out especially if you are down 12 points in evaluation it seems very appropriate and just basic strategy that you use up your time resources to make sure that your opponent doesn't mate you in only those few seconds he has left. Wouldn't you agree? If I had 1:00 left to my opponents 5 seconds and so I was about to flag him but I was in danger of a quick mate I'd feel really dumb if I left most of that minute on the board.
I could get into some other suggestions of things to consider such as material difference, assuming there is no eval. Being in a significant material deficit is more of a red flag of course for rage sitting. But this post is already getting TL;DR. Just to add that it's easy to dismiss the worry and concern that people have for getting such warnings when you and me both know how little chance there is of their account even getting a temporary ban. But to other normally rule abiding people that are not in the know, this can be very disconcerting. Lastly, giving a waring capriciously has a danger of becoming a gateway to more extensive and divergent bad behaviors as some people might see it as sending the message that rules and warnings are not to be taken so seriously.

@benwerner said in #11:

Letting your time run out for over a minute and then resigning with just a few seconds left on the clock is already clearly quite borderline.
So getting a warning for 9 seconds running out on the clock is considered by self-appointed authorities as yourself "well within the borders of common sense."

EDIT: Ok, now I see that you are also a developer... maybe it should also be mentioned on the forum (gold wing like on your profile, not grey/green one like other patrons)? Anyway, if you are a CS student you surely can find somebody passionate about Ergonomics or HMC that can help you avoid mistakes like the ones that made the GIMP interface a bad joke.

@glory88
Ben thinks that you resigned with 9 seconds on your clock still but you seem to be saying you didn't resign and lost by time forfeit with 0 on the clock. I hate seeing big miscommunications so you guys should clear up the misunderstanding.

@Buttercup22
Thank you for bringing that to my attention. I will try to be more understanding.

@benwerner
I, white player, had 9 seconds on the clock when I finished a move.
Then came the turn of my opponent. He also finished his move.
Then came my turn again. Before I could move, my 9 seconds ran out.
And I received a warning for letting my time run out instead of playing.
This was a rapid game (10 minutes per side, no increment), no bullet or blitz.

If you think there is anything unclear with what I have written in this post, please say so now. It would be best if you could repeat with your own words what happened (what I just described you).

@glory88 said in #15:

@Buttercup22
Thank you for bringing that to my attention. I will try to be more understanding.

@benwerner
I, white player, had 9 seconds on the clock when I finished a move.
Then came the turn of my opponent. He also finished his move.
Then came my turn again. Before I could move, my 9 seconds ran out.
And I received a warning for letting my time run out instead of playing.
This was a rapid game (10 minutes per side, no increment), no bullet or blitz.

If you think there is anything unclear with what I have written in this post, please say so now. It would be best if you could repeat with your own words what happened (what I just described you).

I think i'ts pretty clear now. I think the way it works is that if you let a lot of time run out it doesn't matter if you resign or let the last bit of time run out on your next move. I think they probably years ago had it so if you played another move after letting a lot of time run out it would save you from the warnings. But then people probably caught on to that and lots of people let almost all of their time run out except for a few seconds and then resigned, to avoid the warning. So now they have it so you will get the warning whether you let the last seconds run out or resign, either way.
It's the fact that you took almost a minute on your second last turn. But I think less than a minute is much too aggressive in a rapid game. I just finished a rapid game not too long ago where I took longer than 2 minutes for one move in a critical position. The threshold should be much longer than less than 1 minute if you ask me.

I agree with what you have said, although "people probably caught on" makes me ask -- did so many people really pay attention in order to make a last move before their time actually ran out? No matter if it was them or not, somebody ultimately succeeded in provoking grief, as penalizing people who have done nothing wrong became the standard.

@glory88 said in #17:

I agree with what you have said, although "people probably caught on" makes me ask -- did so many people really pay attention in order to make a last move before their time actually ran out? No matter if it was them or not, somebody ultimately succeeded in provoking grief, as penalizing people who have done nothing wrong became the standard.

This is true, this is why I think they should make the threshold much larger than 1 minute for rapid games and consider all the factors.
But in your case, at least going forward you don't have to feel penalized at all if it ever happens again because now you know that there is no penalty. It's just a chat warning and it will not count against you at all in the future unless you had a whole bunch of games in a short time where this happened.