I'm new (in this incarnation) to FIBS. I was on FIBS way back, but not for long. I would like to ask about FIBS etiquette.

I was playing a 1-point match against another player (with lower rating and little experience). I was losing, badly, and would have lost a gammon. My chances of saving gammon were extremely slim, maybe even zero. The game had taken longer than expected and I was about to enter a FIBS tournament. So I resign n, to give my opponent 1 point and the match. My opponent is very, very upset about that.

My opponent insists that he -- he or she is probably a male -- would not have accepted the resignation because he wanted to win the gammon, and that I made the system accept my resignation.

My opponent instantly logged a complaint with repbot, and accused me of being a cheater and dropper in the lobby (i.e., shout). In private (i.e., tell) he said I cheated because I somehow made the system automatically accept my 1 point resignation and he wanted to win the gammon. He or she was also a bit vitriolic.

I have tried to explain that the system -- not me -- automatically accepts any resignation which offers enough points to win the match. I have tried to explain that it does not matter how many points you win a match by. But my opponent is not buying it.

I feel that at worst I am in violation of some unwritten -- or written somewhere that I haven't read it -- rule which says you should resign g or even resign b in this type of situation. In which case, I am terribly sorry. And had my opponent told me that, I would have immediately apologized, and learned my lesson.

Clearly, I am not a dropper -- I completed the match. I am not cheater -- I have no power to "make" the system accept my resignation. Looking at the Ratings formula, I can see that your rating is not affected by your margin of victory or whether you go over.

I also do not find anything on here about the etiquette of resigning. Did I violate some FIBSiquette (or worse)?

Afterword: Note that I tried to "rectify" the situation (to the extent that it needed rectifying). I invited my opponent to two 1-point matches. In the first, I instantly resigned backgammon, in the second, I instantly resigned gammon. Yet, I still had to request that he withdraw his complaint from repbot (which he then did).

I must say you opponent did a bit of cheating by abusing you into giving him/her some extra rating points with your subsequent resigns!  Maybe I'll throw a fit and complain to Repbot the next time I want to play out a possible or a sure gammon!   

Btw, I've experienced this same behavioral phenomena as well.  I went through essentially the same tiring explainations with an upset opponent as you experienced with the exception that I won my argument and didn't offer any reparation in the form of a new forfeiting match.

I'm too tired to argue (and they weren't hearing). It was easier to offer to resign a gammon, and take the high road -- or at least appear to do so. I wouldn't characterize her as bullying me into getting those gammons, nor as cheating (but that's just semantics).

Being a 1 point match makes gammons irrelevant as you know. I suggest you do as I always do in such a situation, resign a BG and be done with it.

Same here...always the highest resign for me too when the match is over...makes no difference to me at all - and I know that, whatever they might be thinking!

That said, whoever created the fuss with you was best ignored, complain back - because I certainly dont want to play that person, and nor will many others if they carry on like that! As socksey says, your rep will soon even out as good players vouch - that is how the system was always designed to work.

You will be lucky to never see a complaint, because there will always be idiots, but overall, the more prevalent viewpoint wins out.

There was a character who complained about every player they ever played..including themselves!!!

There is no correct etiquette to dealing with a rude moron. I advise leaving the match as swiftly as possible, finished or not and ignoring them forthwith.
However, can I take issue with

newbie, inexperienced player, no nothings

by which I assume the writer meant "know nothings". Newbies may not know much, but they deservea a little more respect than that in general.

I assume the writer meant "know nothings". Newbies may not know much, but they deserve a little more respect than that in general.

Objection - argumentative!!

Oh - it seems we are taking it....so, here is my argument.

The assumption that it meant 'know nothings' was fair. The second assumption, that newbies are know nothings who deserve no respect, was not.

A 'know nothing' is much more likely be someone who has been there for some time and refuses to learn.

It was distinct from newbies and inexperienced players - and such, is a reasonable category.

In fact, it is the most reasonable of them all. If someone has been told, but refuses to listen, has been given evidence, a reasonable explanation and still they rant and rail - then they are the least deserving of any respect.

I agree with the avoidance aspect - I resign BG for every match that is lost.

I will explain to newbies, but I don't spend time with insistent 'know nothings'. They get told once, they choose to ignore, well they can complain, shout and cry themselves to sleep for all I care.