Blacklist of Lichess

@h2b2 said : If the aim is to be inclusive and tolerant, intolerance can't be tolerated or the aim is broken. Tolerate all but the intolerant. That's the only way.

In the name of tolerance is sanctioned intolerance.
Who decides when the intolerance begins, and when the tolerance finished?
On what criteria?
Who decide?
Who will be the judges?
The old story of humanity.

@Patatovitch said in #22:
> In the name of tolerance is sanctioned intolerance.
> Who decides when the intolerance begins, and when the tolerance finished?

there's no clearly defined line.

> On what criteria?
> Who decide?

mainly the people who run lichess but also us.

> Who will be the judges?

mainly the people who run lichess but also us.

> The old story of humanity.

don't tolerate the intolerant is more of a thought experiment for me. At this moment, I don't see how something can be considered tolerant if intolerance is tolerated.

@h2b2
Your answer is precise.

Indeed, if the Charter of Lichess applies, and the moderation decides without particular interests, then the debate is closed.
Free projects like Lichess, aimed at empowering their users, giving them free choice to funding, use, and inteligent expression, are based on solid bases.

The platforms that target the milk cow, and therefore on non-independence from their users are toxic.
Lichess's bet seems to win.
It is indeed a larger question.
Wasn't the Internet of the beginning of the same philosophy?
When did it skid the history of the global network?

If the expression is neither violent nor shocking, but simply critical entering any framework, why prohibit it?
The lack of free expression generates toujopurs frustration, then violence, on some side of the handle we are located.

@Patatovitch said in #24:
> @h2b2
> Your answer is precise.
>
> Indeed, if the Charter of Lichess applies, and the moderation decides without particular interests, then the debate is closed.

the way I see it is if lichess is moderated in a way most people don't like, then it will harm lichess. and lichess doesn't want to harm itself. also it's not possible to run a site even with just 100 members without making some mad.

it was said recently the primary function is chess, playing chess, improving chess, etc. Discussing chess hasn't been a primary function as there are better equipped places for that. Non chess discussions? probably way down the radar.

But there is still no answer to my question!!! Why does Lichess have a Blacklist?

@Patatovitch said in #22:
> @h2b2 said : If the aim is to be inclusive and tolerant, intolerance can't be tolerated or the aim is broken. Tolerate all but the intolerant. That's the only way.
>
> In the name of tolerance is sanctioned intolerance.
> Who decides when the intolerance begins, and when the tolerance finished?
> On what criteria?
> Who decide?
> Who will be the judges?
> The old story of humanity.

Be inclusive? What does it mean? In the name of what? It's enough for me that I'm a person with my own thoughts in my head! But is this enough for lichess to consider all their users equal?

@Kalibron said in #25:
> But there is still no answer to my question!!! Why does Lichess have a Blacklist?

You haven't explained your blacklist yet. When I read the word, I think of the list of websites that a firewall or security program has chosen to block. Then I think of the Hollywood filmmakers who were excluded from the industry during America's Red Scare. Neither of those are what you mean.

>But there is still no answer to my question!!! Why does Lichess have a Blacklist?

Because you are not allowed to sandbag, boost, cheat or otherwise violate lichess.org/terms-of-service

@Kalibron said in #25:
> But there is still no answer to my question!!! Why does Lichess have a Blacklist?
But why doesn't it??