Is it wrong to block those who have low game completion rates?

if you start a game but for whatever reason don't play any move, like maybe you checked their completion rate and decided it's too low, it counts against you as an incomplete game and your completion rate drops. It drops pretty quickly too as it only looks back a small number of games.

Ummm...I thought your goal was to win the game. If "they finally made their last stupid move, and then they left the game," why should that matter? You will win the game. It costs you nothing if someone leaves, and you get the victory you were seeking. Or is it about ego? You want them to stay there and absorb their defeat? Some emotional high from that, is there? A win is a win---that's what everyone is playing for anyway.

@theknightdancer . If "they finally made their last stupid move, and then they left the game," why should that matter?

it matters because i don't want to have to wait a minute or two in a blitz game to get my result... or, even longer. its also irritating and rude, actually.

@h2b2 i was thinking of checking opponent's completion rate and aborting - since this is on my mind from this thread - i don't want my completion rate to go down the tubes in the process. thanks for info.

i looked for a way to block ALL PLAYERS below a certain game completion rate, didn't see it. such as: block all people with a game completion rate below 80%. it seems like it'd be a good way to get people to not dump their games when they lose. i'm guessing lichess isn't into having players get impacted by bad sportsmanship ----------- irritating... but, that's how lichess is, i guess.

No, you're welcome to block people for whatever reason you want.

Yeah you can do whatever you want, no one particularly cares. Would I do that? No. But you are entitled to do whatever you want.

I asked a long time ago for a completion rate filter in the game seek option.
I check my opponent's game history - too many time-outs or abandons and I block them.

@theknightdancer You seem to have a very narrow idea that chess is about winning and nothing else, and project this onto others,

For me online chess is not about winning or rating gains; I want to have fun and learn something along the way. Having to wait 10 minutes and stare at a won position ruins the whole experience.

@GyrythII I don't think that's the only reason to play, but for competitive players, it is often the most important reason. All I am saying is you can't force players or people in general to follow your code of sportsmanship. No, they probably shouldn't just abandon a game since this takes a lot of the fun out of it for someone who plays for fun. But that's the chance you take when you play for fun---someone else may act like a jerk and kill the fun of playing. It is what it is. That's all I'm saying. ;-)

@theknightdancer Peace brother, I just wanted to get away from the "wins are all that matter" school of chess. Sometimes I just play moves for the learning experience and not worry much about the end result. Sometimes the phone will ring and I might have to resign a winning position. Running the clock is rude, and the fact that the other person still gets their win doesn't justify it.

@theknightdancer Leaving the clock run instead of resigning or aborting too many games to face the "right" opponent is considered bad behavior. It's not MY code. It is universally accepted among chess players as poor sportsmanship. Also I'm not forcing them to behave the way I want them to, I'm merely keeping myself away from them. You can have as much fun as you like, but if your fun means that others can't have fun, then you're behaving in a bad manner and should expect others to take actions against you.