Playing on iso is a lot more like, in my mind, just playing a friendly game than playing in a tournament. In a tournament, of course I'd never consider it. In a friendly game, I would.
And I see iso as a competitive environment more. Maybe not like world championship tournament but...
I mean, when I play a chess game at the local club, my opponent makes a move and forgets to hit his clock, I don't point it out.
Unless the game's basically over and it's really a big waste of time to drag it out.
This is ridiculous. So is the open post.
I'm fine with your point of view. But it's a little ridiculous to say that my position is ridiculous. Different from yours, yes. Wrong, well I don't think so obviously, but I'd be ok if you were claiming that.
Thing is, almost every environment where there's a game being played is, to an extent, competitive. On iso, I don't know the people, and the conversation is very often at a minimum. If they're chatting with me, I'm more likely to point something like this out. If they ask, I will certainly point something like this out. Somehow, it depends on my mood, too. I was trying to give someone advice yesterday to get duchies before dukes (well, he was going provinces, I was going duchy/duke, and he was planning on upgrading duke->gold at some point, but it never materialized). Well, he didn't listen. But you know, I didn't do this for a while, until after I was quite confident I was winning. It can be a bit arrogant to say something earlier, because man, I'm pretty sure that's a terrible strategy, but you know, I'm not the be-all and end-all of dominion. Technically it's actually against the rules in the chess sense to point this out, and there are many instances where people knowingly don't hit their clock for oh, up to a minute, thinking. And it's definitely illegal to just move without them having hit their clock, not that people usually care. I mean, in the bank case it's a little more clear-cut I guess. But still, for me, iso is a competitive environment, I don't know, because I play with high-quality competition all the time, close to my skill level, who know generally what they're doing, and it's very much an all-out grind to win. Probably for most people, this isn't the case.
By the way, there's almost always some kind of prize up for grabs. On iso, it's rating points, which you may think are worthless, but I think are... almost worthless. At the chess tournaments, it's generally a quite small amount of money. There really aren't tournaments, at least around here, without cash prizes, except for children. But ok, I think even in the competitive setting, I try to give them some advice at some point, just usually not on the first time, because the first time I'm going to assume it's a mistake (or sometimes that they're doing it on purpose for whatever reason), and that I'm being a little bit imposing to point this out. Repeated behaviour makes me think they don't know, so I'll tell them. Of course, Geronimoo points it out at the end of the game here, so ok, I think that's fine.
"I imagine the point of play is to show that I am in some way better than my opponent" I don't think this is really the case, by and large. But to the extent that it is... how is them misplaying banks not a way for them to be worse than you? I mean, yeah, it's not special skill from you being better, but neither is them buying estates on turns 1-2. Neither is a chess player walking into an opening trap that gets them mated or hanging a piece. But I don't think I've ever pointed these things out, except at the end of very long, super-casual games with my close friends. And even there, we stop to count the win, then keep playing to see who would have won without that blunder.