Eliminate the Abort option

 Or if I have a high lag. especially in a blitz game.

The abort option is only there for the first 1.5 moves, so I'm not sure why resigning the game would be better during this time. Perhaps there's some merit to taking it away after each player makes one move, but not altogether. What if you click on a game and your opponent never makes his first move? Seems like it's logical to abort to me.

I like the idea of a limit

Here's the thing: Every once in awhile, when I play live chess, if I'm having a really great game, my opponent just stops playing entirely and lets the clock run out. I hate blitz chess with a passion, so it's either wait out 15-20 minutes or resign. I typically have reading material I can bring up on the computer, research to do, and other things of that nature, but I come here to play chess. 

Take away the abort option, and you have people that do that same thing from the start of a game. Rather petty, but it's happened to me before as soon as the abort option went away. There are people like that out there.

Myself, I don't abort. I don't care who I'm playing, I don't care what color I play, but I also don't care to sit through games where my opponent doesn't move and hopes to wear out my patience and snag a cheap win. But, that's just me. Maybe there's some people out there with an abnormal amount of free time and a patience that surpasses my own. It is certainly possible.

In a short time this evening I have been treated to 2 aborts and an abandoned game leaving the clock to run out.  Some people just have such a great opinion of themselves I guess they think that with the anonymity of cyberspace they can behave like they've just been extruded from a distended dark brown orifice.

 The anonymity of cyberspace isn't all that anonomous.

I think the "number of aborts" stat should exist and be well visible by all users.

Chess.com admin is entirely at liberty to establish any rules they like with regard to the abort function or anything else on their site.  They have a legal obligation though to paid members especially to be absolutely specific what those rules are. I fail to see the point of providing an abort feature and then in an arbitary way, punishing members for using it. Put in some time and effort and establish your specific site rules chess.com, for the best experience of members. Then notify members properly and then enforce them.  The current position is unprofessional, legallly unsound, confusing and annoying.

Please cite the appropriate law.

 And if you purposely click on a match, and you see that your opponent is white, should you have the right to abort?

Or if you purposely click on a match, and your opponent plays e4, and you don't like the open games, should you have the right to abort?

Yeah, everyone should have to play games they don't want to, to teach the few people who abuse aborts a lesson.  Great thinking.

This thread should be locked for being a stealth political discussion.  Naturally, my position is: aborts for some, free miniature American flags for everyone else.

As a young boy, I dreamed of being a baseball, but tonight I say, we must move forward, not backward, upward not forward, and always twirling, twirling, twirling towards freedom.

There should be limited aborts.

Man: Well I think I might vote for a third party candidate...

Alien: Go ahead, throw your vote away!

And then the Ross Perot hat.  Magnifique.

When my opponent aborts the game it's because he or she sees that I have a much higher rating or too many wins on him or her. This is why I'm not objecting.

I've always found bold red text to be ideal for not objecting.