Good evening and sorry for the late reply. First I must say, thank you for actually reading my post and (as far as I can tell) taking the points serious, or at least not deliberatly misunderstanding me. This is a good start and above average for such politically and emotionally charged discussions on the internet.
@QueenRosieMary said in #215:
> The amount of publicity and interest this blog has generated is I think, not so much in proportion to the amount of people perpetrating this harassment, but rather in proportion to the harm it does and the hurt it causes. Let's not conflate the two things. I would say that 99.9% of the inbox messages I have received on this post (and there are a lot) have been friendly, positive and supportive. There have been only two or three people who have been either critical or abusive. A very small proportion for sure,
This is all a very good sign :)
> but I guarantee you that the 0.1% is taking up more than 0.1% of my thoughts, unfortunately.
This not. You shouldn't give those idiots so much power over your head. Injustice happens to everyone of us all of the time, resilience is an important skill in life. Just remember often, the thing that such idiots hate the most is simply being ignored.
>
>
>
> Well I appreciate you saying you are not primarily criticising me, but I don't think Lichess is doing anything wrong here either.
> This blog has been the #1 trending community blog on Lichess in the past day or so, for better or worse, the algorithm is putting it on the front page because it is a hot topic. I did not expect my personal blog to reach so many viewers either, 7.7k at the time of posting, but there it is. Life surprises us sometimes. The fact that it is so popular supports the position that this is an issue people do want to read about and discuss.
Well, as said in the other post, I assumed the articles on the front side were manually curated. If it's the algortihm it's not directly their fault however, if (as theorized in the other post too) the algortihm favors articles that create many replys, it favors drama, which is a questionable design choice, in my oppinion.
>
>
>
> I don't agree that I have been over-dramatic or fearmongering. If anything I have had to leave out a lot of detail because it is simply not suitable to publish. Trust me all of it happened, and more that I didn't talk about. Obviously I'm not going name users publicly or shame anyone, or include actual screenshots
As said in my other post to me it feels a lot like moral outrage and also a "please join me in my outrage" . The whole article contains a lot of value judgments, implications, inferences and connotation, it's far a way from a factual report. Also you don't even try to seek out women who are generally happy with the chess world and include their oppinion, it's one sided from the beginning and written with a very clear mission and intention.
>
> Re. "virtue-signalling", honestly, if you know the personal cost that has come with publishing this blog, (which I considered not writing for a few weeks by the way as I suspected some readers may not receive it well), you would understand that no one in their right mind would write something like this, or make things like this up just for likes and views, given the backlash that is surely coming.
Well everything comes with a cost. You might differ but I think partly your own emotional life and how you react to things and feel about them is your own responsiblity. I think reporting such idiots should be enough.
And also I think this moral outrage and being the "bright public crusader for the right thing" and the "voice of the silent oppressed" also gives you something, it's a nice self-image. You also get a lot of possitive feedback too. It's the same on twitter, people that start moral outrage threads there also get something from it, otherwise they wouldn't do it. I don't judge you for this, we all have our little guilty little pleasures, but please be honest about it. You wouldn't do this if this wouldn't give you something
