The rules of chess are unambiguous. When it is your move:
- You cannot move into check. Doing so would not be a legal move.
- If you are in check and there are no legal moves available, you are in checkmate and have lost the game.
- If you are not in check and there are no legal moves available, that is stalemate and you have drawn the game.
The position posted on chess.com is therefore an example of a misapprehension. Many people think checkmate involves being able to capture the king or some such, just that the game stops immediately before hand. The metaphor may be useful for teaching purposes but it’s just not the case.
Talking of which, the next example was about capturing the king! Well, the Go rules @GreenAsJade posted above covers that quite succinctly:
It should be noted that (especially for tournaments) there would need to be a further layer of rules and proprieties concerning things like clocks and time, physical disturbances, ambiguous placements, getting unfair advice, and so on. (What Barry Phease succinctly dubbed “not rules of the game, but rules about playing the game”.)
I agree, the Chinese rules are logically simplest. Funny how I play Japanese rules OTB all the time, maybe because it usually doesn’t matter and I feel like it involves less counting?