@CyberShredder
"it is dumb or misinformed. In chess there's no government or justice, there are players and they need to take power in their hands. There are also companies like chess com that abuse their power."
If there is no government or justice then this discussion is not even worth holding, because if it is so then we might aswell just all play with engines running and make it a battle of who has the most powerfull PC to calculate deeper... These organizations (FIDE,Chess.com,Lichess) need to take this responsibility in their own hands. It doesnt matter if we are talking chess or any other subject, there will always be people who abuse their power, I do agree with you in that regard.
"There's no democracy in chess either. Voices of different players have different amount of weight. Now I am seeing that people who as I said never opened a book and have no respect for chess have way too much weight."
Well thats how democracy is like IRL aswell, it's just that it is the least shitty of systems we figured out. And I highly doubt anyones opinion has "too much weight", sure everybody can post their standpoint into the void of the net, but I think that once you reach a certian rating, you are enough of a professional chess player to legitamet your opinions, if you agree or not is a personal thing.
"I don't see any Messiah complex, and you wouldn't if there wasn't this massive psyop online. He was always called the most wicked, evil individual. Portrayed as his words can incite suicide."
Read that sentence again, slowly and think about it...
"And most people who decided to go after him are either paid shills (chess com partners) or people who don't understand chess or cheating."
The good old "who doesn't agree is against me." You don't need to have 2000 elo to understand this situation.
"Also you can never hold someone accountable in a form of removing the title. What next? They remove title from Alekhine and Fischer retrospectively?"
I never elaborated how Kramnik should be held accountable, but I dont think removing a title is being held accountable... But if it were, then no, because the GM who isnt alive doesnt really face any consequences if the mortals choose to remove his title.
@db222 You don't need 2000 elo. You at least need to see both Kramnik's point of view and others. You need to be in the context of the conversation. What different GMs think about cheating problem, and cheaters. See podcast I linked in the blog. See Nepomniachii videos about cheating. See Kramnik's videos. You shouldn't jump to conclusions without analyzing the topic. People are running around with Kramnik "baseless accusations". It was never baseless and nobody would bother if there weren't other titled players having same questions as Kramnik has. Read a chess book. Some people affecting the conversation never read.
If FIDE or Lichess should take responsibility, they should side with Kramnik against the mob. I saw today a video of 17 million youtuber openly insulting Kramnik because he decided to jump on the hypetrain. Everyone sees the incentives here.
It is like democracy IRL but not everything should be a democracy. You don't want chess to be the same retarded place the world is.
@CyberShredder said in #12:
> @db222 You don't need 2000 elo. You at least need to see both Kramnik's point of view and others. You need to be in the context of the conversation. What different GMs think about cheating problem, and cheaters. See podcast I linked in the blog. See Nepomniachii videos about cheating. See Kramnik's videos. You shouldn't jump to conclusions without analyzing the topic. People are running around with Kramnik "baseless accusations". It was never baseless and nobody would bother if there weren't other titled players having same questions as Kramnik has. Read a chess book. Some people affecting the conversation never read.
>
> If FIDE or Lichess should take responsibility, they should side with Kramnik against the mob. I saw today a video of 17 million youtuber openly insulting Kramnik because he decided to jump on the hypetrain. Everyone sees the incentives here.
So?? Kramik does stop stuff, but you are right in one way
I give you 75% credit for that long explanation.
>
> It is like democracy IRL but not everything should be a democracy. You don't want chess to be the same retarded place the world is.
@db222 said in #11:
> @CyberShredder
>
> "it is dumb or misinformed. In chess there's no government or justice, there are players and they need to take power in their hands. There are also companies like chess com that abuse their power."
>
> If there is no government or justice then this discussion is not even worth holding, because if it is so then we might aswell just all play with engines running and make it a battle of who has the most powerfull PC to calculate deeper... These organizations (FIDE,Chess.com,Lichess) need to take this responsibility in their own hands. It doesnt matter if we are talking chess or any other subject, there will always be people who abuse their power, I do agree with you in that regard.
>
> "There's no democracy in chess either. Voices of different players have different amount of weight. Now I am seeing that people who as I said never opened a book and have no respect for chess have way too much weight."
>
> Well thats how democracy is like IRL aswell, it's just that it is the least shitty of systems we figured out. And I highly doubt anyones opinion has "too much weight", sure everybody can post their standpoint into the void of the net, but I think that once you reach a certian rating, you are enough of a professional chess player to legitamet your opinions, if you agree or not is a personal thing.
>
> "I don't see any Messiah complex, and you wouldn't if there wasn't this massive psyop online. He was always called the most wicked, evil individual. Portrayed as his words can incite suicide."
>
> Read that sentence again, slowly and think about it...
>
> "And most people who decided to go after him are either paid shills (chess com partners) or people who don't understand chess or cheating."
>
> The good old "who doesn't agree is against me." You don't need to have 2000 elo to understand this situation.
>
> "Also you can never hold someone accountable in a form of removing the title. What next? They remove title from Alekhine and Fischer retrospectively?"
>
> I never elaborated how Kramnik should be held accountable, but I dont think removing a title is being held accountable... But if it were, then no, because the GM who isnt alive doesnt really face any consequences if the mortals choose to remove his title.
> I never elaborated how Kramnik should be held accountable, but I dont think removing a title is being held accountable... But if it were, then no, because the GM who isnt alive doesnt really face any consequences if the mortals choose to remove his title.
NO. Never
Good.Not super like @CyberShredder
@db222 said in #9:
> None of us know what Daniel has dealed with mentally, appart from Kramniks allegations. Holding Kramnik accountable as the only and absolute factor for the passing of Naroditsky is not being "dumb" as you state it. I think this is just a natural human thought process. We always seek for answers, and if there is no clear answer we will form one with the information we do have. When it comes to tragic situations like this, we feel morally obliged to enforce some sort of justice.
Well you said it yourself in the beginning - none of us know what Daniel has dealt with mentally. Regarding it being a natural human thought process - it is possible to simply think it, but without acting in the public sphere through mob mentality.
About moral obligation - I think that most of the people in the mob simply have the motivation of feasting on drama and hate. I don't think most of them really care about harassment on the basis that a lot of these people try to downplay similar false accusations from public figures whom they personally like against people who they dislike.
> It's not for me to say if Kramnik is right or wrong, however, I think his Idea of being chess' Messias who will single handedly save this game from foul play shows a surpiriority complex, a lack of understanding and acceptance how justice and government systems work in a democratic society. That is the reason Vladimir should face consequences, not the specific case of Daniel Naroditsky, but his selfproclaimed policing of other professionals.
Not just Kramnik but everyone who slanders others with false accusations.
There is also the question of what consequences and how will they deter false accusations in the future. Removing Kramnik's titles as other have suggested doesn't address this. Kramnik earned those titles. What does removing a symbol of chess mastery have to do with addressing false cheating accusations?
And why do those who promote that 'petition' not having anything to say about how to prevent such things from happening again as well as also deliberately trying to minimize the false accusations of others?
@RuyLopez1000 I agree with you that their is double standard towards Kramnik. But I don't agree that problem of "false allegations" (how do you determine are they false?) comes first. Problem of cheating comes first. And a lot of grandmasters said that unless there's an arbiter right beside the player in prize tournaments this problem can't be solved.
@CyberShredder
> But I don't agree that problem of "false allegations" (how do you determine are they false?) comes first. Problem of cheating comes first.
I think protecting people from being falsely accused is the highest priority. Stopping false allegations also does not have to mean letting cheaters get away with it. Cheating accusations should be addressed privately and not publicly.
Determine that accusations are not supported through showing no evidence of cheating (through proper statistical analysis by people with the qualifications for it).
Ken Regan (does anti-cheating work with FIDE) shared how his system works in this article:
https://arbiters.europechess.org/wp-content/uploads/ArbitersCorner/Files/ECU-Magazine-April-2025-16-19.pdf
I totally agree with your blog. These same people who were attacking Kramnik were the people making fun of Hans Niemann in way worse ways, who at the time was just a teenager. It's all group-think and conformity with these people. They have no original thoughts of their own. Utterly disgusting behavior.
@PLZbeatme said in #19:
> I agree. Kramnik is 100 percent responsible and he should be banned and go to jail>:(
now you are doing exactly what kramnik was doing