"Accusing other players of using computer assistance or otherwise cheating is not acceptable..."

I received a message from Lichess earlier stating this. However, as far as I'm aware, I haven't accused anyone directly of cheating in chat.

Does anyone know if this is just an automated response if someone has accused you of this? I'm a bit annoyed about it as it doesn't give you the right to reply and ask who made the accusation, so basically I have no idea why I received this.

You can try lichess.org/appeal

@ShiningDrongo said in #2:

You can try lichess.org/appeal

Thanks. It probably isn't worth it as it just said they would remove chat privilege if it was repeatedly violated.

It's just kind of funny that they sent this without any reasoning at all. I actually shut down my chess.com account and moved here in light of the reason situation and their behaviour, yet now I am being accused of something with nothing provided!

They @MidiChlorianCount said in #3:

Yet now I am being accused of something with nothing provided!

The message made no accusation; it only insinuated something... following Magnus's lead, I guess.

So you accused them indirectly, same thing
'The world is just a great big onion'

Hello,

This warning is not automatic and sent by a human moderator after reviewing the case. If you feel it was unjustified do not hesitate to appeal.

@SOJB said in #5:

So you accused them indirectly, same thing
'The world is just a great big onion'

No, not even indirectly. The closest thing I can even think of was a game I played against someone which went well down a traxler line.

I said "WP" after a number of moves as they hadn't followed any of the usual paths, and then at the end something like "I don't think I've come across anyone counter that so well". But I don't think even that could be considered an "indirect" accusation. Besides, they replied "Ha ha. Thanks" or something like that. So I don't think it was even that...

A Lichess Moderator said in #6:

Hello,

This warning is not automatic and sent by a human moderator after reviewing the case. If you feel it was unjustified do not hesitate to appeal.

Thank you. I was saying further up that I don't think that's really worthwhile as it only said chat privileges would be suspended for repeated violation. It is interesting to hear that it isn't automatic but given the accuser / game in question isn't made available in the accusation message I have no way of reviewing myself.

@MidiChlorianCount said in #7:

No, not even indirectly. The closest thing I can even think of was a game I played against someone which went well down a traxler line.

I said "WP" after a number of moves as they hadn't followed any of the usual paths, and then at the end something like "I don't think I've come across anyone counter that so well". But I don't think even that could be considered an "indirect" accusation. Besides, they replied "Ha ha. Thanks" or something like that. So I don't think it was even that...
Well only you know if you were being facetious or not,in your heart

@SOJB said in #9:

Well only you know if you were being facetious or not,in your heart

Well exactly. But in this particular case, not even that. As I said, I'd already "WP"d them on an earlier move.

Red flags for me are new-ish account + no time used + well done the line on a very non standard opening. But then I just block that user after the game so I never have to play them again. Never accused anyone of cheating, even if I have suspicions.