@sgtlaugh said in #650:
> If you say that, then we are on the same page. There is no contradiction.
>
> Please read this comment on #593 - lichess.org/forum/general-chess-discussion/blog-ZNTniBEAACEAJZTn?page=60#593
>
> The point is, you can never know for sure when physical proof is absent. Not in courtrooms, not outside it. While I do not support vigilante justice, at the same time, not every matter can or should be resolved in a courtroom. In this case, allegations of sexual assault are a very concerning matter. The sexual assault itself is a crime. Ideally, the victims should also have reported this to the police and the authorities. But due to various reasons, such is not the case for most sexual assaults. As such, when USCF or STLCC was notified, they had a moral responsibility to take some sort of countermeasures which they failed to do so for a long time. No one is asking them to take the role of law enforcement.
>
> In a court, usually the stakes are higher and so the burden of proof and assessment is more critical. Outside the court, these variables change. So not everything can or should be argued from a law and order perspective.
All I am saying is that they also had a moral responsibility to make sure the allegations were true before punishing them. If I were to allege that you committed a crime against me, would Lichess have a moral responsibility to kick you off the website? Or would the moral thing to do is check if I was telling the truth?
Also, maybe that's why it took so long. They didn't want to just punish people before they were convinced that it was true.
But the issue that I have, and I believe others as well, is that I do not trust the judgement of chess organizations when it comes to criminal matters. If the allegation occurred in a Walmart, would the CEO of Walmart get to decide if the person was innocent or guilty?
>
>
>
> I am arguing about the possibilities, also the punishment should fit the crime. The death penalty for sexual harassment seems extreme to me. You need to consider all these variables when deciding the actions. Apologies if that felt like a contradiction. I am not against punishing perpetrators.
I also must apologize, I only support the death penalty for actual rape, not sexual harassment.
> If you say that, then we are on the same page. There is no contradiction.
>
> Please read this comment on #593 - lichess.org/forum/general-chess-discussion/blog-ZNTniBEAACEAJZTn?page=60#593
>
> The point is, you can never know for sure when physical proof is absent. Not in courtrooms, not outside it. While I do not support vigilante justice, at the same time, not every matter can or should be resolved in a courtroom. In this case, allegations of sexual assault are a very concerning matter. The sexual assault itself is a crime. Ideally, the victims should also have reported this to the police and the authorities. But due to various reasons, such is not the case for most sexual assaults. As such, when USCF or STLCC was notified, they had a moral responsibility to take some sort of countermeasures which they failed to do so for a long time. No one is asking them to take the role of law enforcement.
>
> In a court, usually the stakes are higher and so the burden of proof and assessment is more critical. Outside the court, these variables change. So not everything can or should be argued from a law and order perspective.
All I am saying is that they also had a moral responsibility to make sure the allegations were true before punishing them. If I were to allege that you committed a crime against me, would Lichess have a moral responsibility to kick you off the website? Or would the moral thing to do is check if I was telling the truth?
Also, maybe that's why it took so long. They didn't want to just punish people before they were convinced that it was true.
But the issue that I have, and I believe others as well, is that I do not trust the judgement of chess organizations when it comes to criminal matters. If the allegation occurred in a Walmart, would the CEO of Walmart get to decide if the person was innocent or guilty?
>
>
>
> I am arguing about the possibilities, also the punishment should fit the crime. The death penalty for sexual harassment seems extreme to me. You need to consider all these variables when deciding the actions. Apologies if that felt like a contradiction. I am not against punishing perpetrators.
I also must apologize, I only support the death penalty for actual rape, not sexual harassment.