MC‘s real statement

@thefrickouttaherelol said in #59:

Why is the Lichess forum consistently so salty about everything? Not sure what the obsession with negativity on the free chess site is. Everyone here out to attack Magnus or Niemann. Give it time.

Finegold made a pretty funny comment on twitter about this - something along the lines of "truth doesn't matter, just pick a side and get on with it"!

Personally I don't even think it is a case of being either pro Carlsen or pro Niemann. Carlsen - the World Champion! - has indirectly, via insinulation and his behaviour, and now directly accused another player of cheating without providing any actual evidence. That's the only known absolute truth and it's pretty amazing he can do so.

@odoaker2015 said in #44:

How on earth do you consider yourself to be in the position to judge Niemann's games? Talking about ego....
And who are you that denies Nomoreusernames the ability to do so?

Here, as so often, you are subject to a logical fallacy. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument_from_authority

I guess you missed the part in which the poster acknowledged their mistake and apologized?

Besides, asking people not to talk about stuff they are not competent about seems just basic manners to me. I would never say "that super GM played pathetically", not even if the engine suggests low accuracy (which wasn't the case, for the record, hence the poster rightly apologized), because there is no way for me to grasp the complexity of a position at super GM level. And the same is true for most people in here.
In summary, don't talk about stuff you don't know, or if you really can't resist at least try to be humble about it.

Sincerely,
Magnus Carlsen – World Chess Champion

@odoaker2015 said in #56:

Why does that look so bad? And who says this will be fought in American courts? And this is not a criminal court either. As long as there is no evidence, Niemann can relax. And Niemann doesn't have to prove that he didn't cheat in OTB chess either. On the contrary, the court must prove that he did and not the other way around. No one has to incriminate himself, and staying silent shouldn't be construed as an admission of guilt.

Also, Magnus Carlsen would stand trial for defamation, not Niemann. So Carlsen has to justify himself here and not Niemann. Carlsen has to answer questions here.

Carlsen has now clearly accused Niemann of cheating otb against him in St. Louis. Niemann has unequivocally denied cheating over the board against Carlsen in St. Louis. Carlsen has offered no facts to prove his accusation that Niemann cheated otb in St. Louis. The arbiter in St. Louis has stated clearly that he is aware of nothing occurring in St. Louis that would indicate cheating by any of the competitors in St. Louis. Ken Regan has analyzed the 3rd round game between Carlsen and Niemann finding no statistical basis supporting suspicion that Niemann cheated in that game or any other otb game in St. Louis or elsewhere.

Carlsen has made an allegation against Niemann of cheating otb against him in St. Louis that appears on its face to be a false charge of cheating. As GM Nigel Davis points out, Carlsen should now be investigated and sanctioned by the FIDE Ethics Commission for making a false charge of cheating. "This is a very clear accusation of cheating, but without actual evidence. I think it's time for the FIDE Ethics Commission to step in as they did in the Solozhenkin case."--Nigel Davis on Twitter, 9/26/2022

@Cedur216

"it was certainly not when there was a lot more stable evidence and judging by your aggressive exclamations, and the fact that cheating can never be proven in your eyes ..."

Here you are dishonest again. I never said that cheating online can never be proven. But if you never get any evidence presented, you can and should be critical. And what a lot more stable evidence?

Therefore, the votes for an independent body reviewing such cases are correct. It's unacceptable for chess websites to do their own thing about anti-cheating without being able to verify that the practice is correct. This also applies to the Carlsen/Niemann affair. And an independent body would be a good authority to review such cases!

And instead of acting like Carlsen, this body would be involved beforehand. Here Carlsen acted wrongly and unethically. It must not come to that anymore. So that there are no scandals in the first place!

@VTWood said in #64:

Carlsen has now clearly accused Niemann of cheating otb against him in St. Louis. Niemann has unequivocally denied cheating over the board against Carlsen in St. Louis. Carlsen has offered no facts to prove his accusation that Niemann cheated otb in St. Louis. The arbiter in St. Louis has stated clearly that he is aware of nothing occurring in St. Louis that would indicate cheating by any of the competitors in St. Louis. Ken Regan has analyzed the 3rd round game between Carlsen and Niemann finding no statistical basis supporting suspicion that Niemann cheated in that game or any other otb game in St. Louis or elsewhere.

Carlsen has made an allegation against Niemann of cheating otb against him in St. Louis that appears on its face to be a false charge of cheating. As GM Nigel Davis points out, Carlsen should now be investigated and sanctioned by the FIDE Ethics Commission for making a false charge of cheating. "This is a very clear accusation of cheating, but without actual evidence. I think it's time for the FIDE Ethics Commission to step in as they did in the Solozhenkin case."--Nigel Davis on Twitter, 9/26/2022

Exactly! That's also my opinion!

Ofc we can still discuss if Magnus acted fair and square and if he had better options. E.g. resigning a game was still not sportsmanlike and I didn't really like it, even if it shows he's right. But regarding communications, Magnus surely has a team of lawyers and we can hardly judge what's safe for him to say and what's not

@odoaker2015 you didn't say it but you act like it ... seriously though, what does prove cheating in your eyes? If algorithms showing use of engine do not, then what does? And are you happy with potentially cleaning a lot of actual cheaters with such attitude?

Lichess and chesscom do not discuss individual decisions but their procedures are not as shadowy as you think - they have good reputation and official endorsement in some way (e.g. USCF endorses Lichess' anticheat)

@VTWood said in #64:

Carlsen has now clearly accused Niemann of cheating otb against him in St. Louis.

Clearly? I suggest you carefully read the statement again.

Sure, this statement gives the impression of being written by a lawyer, and it probably is. But where in this statement does Calsen claim Niemann cheated OTB against him in St. Louis? As far as I can see, it isn't there.

On one end Magnus already felt bad about Niemann before sinquefield:

When Niemann was invited last minute to the 2022 Sinquefield cup, I strongly considered withdrawing prior to the event. I ultimately chose to play

but on the other end that game had an impact in Magnus' thinking:

throughout our game in the Sinquefield cup I had the impression ... This game contributed to changing my perspective

Final outcome is still open and unclear ... but I think there's no base anymore to call Magnus a sore loser or madman. (Like, I think there never was)

It has been confirmed by several sources that Carlsen had problems with Niemann participating even before their game, and this debunks the silly idea that all this drama was trivially due to the fact that he was just tilted by the fact of losing.