cd power:
This site has a 1000/2000 move/most moves in a day achievement. This means that lost games are more likely played on when the game if no longer entertaining.
The Laws of chess are clear the lone King never wins.
ICCF doesn't envisage a player playing on with bare king and there is no incentive to play on with a bare king. My suspicion is a bare king on ICCF wouldn't get the point and if it did the rule would change. They have rules envisaging the possiblity of adjudication and backdating time extension.

Implementing the Laws of Chess can't be that hard there numerous open source programs that correctly detect 3 fold repetition, 50 move rule and insufficent mating material.

As to why so many game.
When I was a pawn and later a knight I tried to enter prize tournament only to be denied due to no unrated players being allowed.
When my knight was about to go back to a pawn I entered as many tournaments as I would be severely restricted as a pawn.

It is perverse that the pawn can in theory win higher membership, only to be denied entry to free prize event due to lack of rating and the ratings take ages to get because of restriction on games.

This issue isn't about me, it is about whether a player who can't obtain the victory conditions of a game on the board should gain victory on the clock.

If someone really doesn't understand they are totally lost or really wants a game to accumulate moves fine, but anyone who thinks they should get a so called "timeout win" when it is impossible to achieve the game victory condition is IMO a bit pathetic..

Would this site be better if chess rules were correctly implemented?
Would it be better if you didn't have to make to click pass or enter the only legal move available?
My understanding is Fencer actually wants to improve this site and can only do that with constructive feedback.