Should I flag my opponents?

I dont really like winning by flagging my opponents. It feels like a dirty way to win, especially when you are losing. I also feel like it inflates your rating as flagging does not really reflect your skill level.  Is that just a normal part of playing chess, or should i avoid doing it? 

Better is to play with increment: no flagging.

If you feel had about it, resign when losing ... rather than winning on time.

Flagging is (unfortunatelly) part of the game.

Agree with you: it is a very poor way to win just to inflate rate and ego of some players. Usually I resign if it's clear I will loose. Personally I can't understand what the aim of stealing 6/7/8 points winning by clock a position when you are K&pawn against Q&R&pawns (just happened).

Different if we are in a drawn position: if we are stuck in the same position but I get on it in less time, then I deserve to win...

Flagging is on the rule, but it's not fair. In my experience the highest is the rate of the opponent, the less they flag. I think it's a matter of attitude: great players don't need to force the rules

Flagging is great and it is part of the game. Just the way you flag people and win, sometimes you will be the one being flagged.

I feel it's totally ok to win by flagging as long as you are not in a clearly losing position. Then you should have resigned.

Just don't play blitz or bullet problem solved 

I don't entirely agree that flagging does not really reflect your skill level.  I have had a handful of games where I am short on material and my opponent is short on time.  My plan when this happens is to avoid being checkmated and to complicate things for him.  Believe it or not, this does require some skill.

On the other side, I have had opponents try to flag me by making aimless moves in clearly drawn positions.  That doesn't take any skill, and the game usually is drawn by the 50-move rule.

It just means makes them run out of time. So you move fast and don't get mated you don't have to try and mate just make fast moves that don't lose and you win. 

If it is unethical to flag someone in blitz, then it is unethical to win because you're up material or have a better position. You got the time advantage because your opponent messed up (Took too long). You got the material or better position because your opponent messed up (Played bad moves). Where is the difference?

Yes.  Flag away.

Yes, it's perfectly fine to flag your opponents. Flagging is just a part of chess. It's your opponent's fault if they move too slow, and it's just like beating them by checkmate or resignation or something like that.

usual statements from a flagger... which don't distinguish "legitimate" from "fair". But, who am I to judge who is proud to steal a victory?

that one is playing chess, the other one is just moving pieces random on the chessboard... you can be proud of this solution, of course, I think it's silly and unfair

and when you won by clock a position clearly lost with 0.1" ? Is it the opponent "too slow" or you won just for luck? Cm'on! be honest, be fair... nobody will die if you resign in a position you deserve to loose

listen:

Blitz, bullet, and fast rapid requires you to balance quality and speed.

That is why there is a BLITZ championship and a CLASSICAL championship.

One evaluates your ability to play fastly but still accurately

One evaluates your ability to play chess

flagging is a part of the game, it is their problem if they took so long, they proved they are unable to play chess speedily, so they deserve it.

If you don't like it, play classical or daily chess

Go ahead! Your opponent used up the clock, punish em for it!

You do not deserve to lose a position you win on time in, and it doesn't really matter if you have 0.1 at the end. The clock is still a part of chess, and if you flag your opponent then it doesn't matter what the position is on the board.

This is a huge part of both blitz and bullet. Are you saying I should resign in that scenario in a speed chess game too? Nonsense. I won't resign because I was about to win.

It's still the same thing for rapid and classical time controls as well. Although it's not nearly as common that you get low on time, You still need to move fast enough to where you aren't going to lose on time.

I never consider it luck because I won on time, nor do I consider it luck for my opponent when I lose on time because, as I said in the thing I wrote that you quoted, flagging is a part of chess. Learn to use it correctly.

are you don't understanding me or simply pretending to not understand?

I'm not arguing about the fact it's legal. I'm stating it is unfair. And I show you a case that happened many times: when someone win for 0.1".

I'm wondering: is the 0.1" enough to balance the completely lost position?

If you think the answer is "YES": ok, that's your opinion. I think the answer is "NO", so don't be bother if then you get the label of "flagger". Personally, I prefer being a "player", not a "flagger".

But I can understand many users choose to keep their rate, and loose their dignity.

I completely understood what you said. Not only is flagging legal, it's completely fair.

What I don't understand is, if you feel this way about flagging, why are 10,000 of your 10,700 games blitz? Just play daily chess. Flagging will rarely be an issue.