What constitutes "public shaming"?

Recently I played a game where I had a strong feeling that my opponent was cheating. I reported it immediately, and my opponent was quickly banned by the site. But I was confused about why my rating points weren't refunded (I now understand why - my Classical rating was provisional), so I asked about this in a forum post (lichess.org/forum/lichess-feedback/why-werent-my-rating-points-refunded-vs-a-banned-cheater).

My post included my opponent's username and a link to the game in question. Some of the commenters on my post complained about my "public shaming" of my opponent because I included his username. I was not verbally abusing him or making an unconfirmed accusation - he had already been banned by the site, so I was simply stating an established fact.

The only mention of "public shaming" I can find in the Lichess rules is in the "Chat Etiquette" (lichess.org/page/chat-etiquette), and the examples that they give (“is ... a cheater?”, “...is an idiot”, “...is a noob, "...is a loser”) sound like insults and/or unconfirmed accusations, not merely identifying a confirmed cheater like I did. I cannot imagine that Lichess prohibits stating that a certain username has been banned for cheating. Are the commenters on my post over-applying the concept of "public shaming"?

I would especially appreciate if any actual Lichess mods could chime in. Either way, I think Lichess should clarify in its policies what does and doesn't constitute "public shaming".

Thanks,

Alex

Even if there is good evidence that someone was cheating, it is hard to prove. So they could make a legal affair from it.
Remark: A couple of years ago the red text was indeed "This user uses computer assistance". Lichess changed that to "violated ToS", probably for not being prosecuted for an affirmation that is not 100 percent proved.

Really, what purpose has the naming of a (most probable) cheater? If you didn't get a rating refund, it is a matter between you and the moderators. There are rules why points are not refunded - maybe you had already too many games after you lost against the cheater, so your rating was already balanced again.

If somebody has cheated, then he won't be paired with me again, so I do not need to know their username either. Nor does any other player.

Hi, thanks for your reply.

I'm not sure whether someone "could make a legal affair from it", but if that is an actual risk then all the more reason for Lichess to make clearer in its policies to exactly what extent someone can refer to or identify banned accounts.

As far as the purpose of identifying cheaters - my post was referring to a certain game, and I thought that the game link would be relevant and of interest. No, it wasn't necessary to include, but I don't see why it's necessary to avoid either. We don't shy away from identifying people who have been convicted of committing a crime; why should we shy away from identifying people who have been convicted (not legally of course, but by the site) of a much lesser offense?

Thanks,

Alex

@OjaiJoao said in #3:
> We don't shy away from identifying people who have been convicted of committing a crime.

"We" in that sentence means "United States justice", right? Never occured to you that Lichess is French and other legal norms might apply?
But still: There is a difference between "convicted" and "having some strong evidence against".

After all, you are doing the right thing to ask for a more precise specification of the term "public shaming". I just answer for myself; I find nothing wrong in the way Lichess handles that matter. But independently of my liking: my experience in these forums has always been that the naming of cheaters or cheater suspects was disapproved, also by moderators.

Perhaps it was a nest with yellow.black striped flying insects.

What if the player you are naming appeals against his account having violated TOS and gets the decision reversed? You need to think a little more as to why restrictions are in place.

@OjaiJoao said in #1:
> Some of the commenters on my post complained about my "public shaming" of my opponent because I included his username. I was not verbally abusing him or making an unconfirmed accusation - he had already been banned by the site, so I was simply stating an established fact.

I got last year a warning from a lichess-moderator about something similar. Somebody was already banned some time ago but still the moderator warned me that this doesn't give me the right to talk about it. Anything about violations, refunding,... should never be discussed with other users but directly happen via the official appeal-procedure of lichess.

So I keep now strictly this policy and also made some changes to my lichess-playing to avoid/ limit some annoying situations.

There are so many cheats on here, they should rename it "script-chess".

Its free and works perfectly when you keep your expectations at that level.

As per request, we will provide additional clarifications on the policy.

ToS mark is unified - if you see red decoration on someone's profile, they can be banned for the rating manipulation (sandbagging/boosting) or for using outside assistance (cheating). The issue for what someone is marked for is between the account owner and lichess. For privacy reasons, we will never discuss/disclose that in public. One of the reasons is that there might be false positives and the user can successfully appeal our decision.

If you suspect someone report them. If someone is already marked don't mention it publicly. The TOS say to be nice. It is not nice to ridicule people. When someone asks why they can't join a tourney you may politely point out their account is marked if that is the obvious reason. You are not allowed to accuse others or point out someone is marked other than the previous exception.

It is ok to ask about rating refunds but please do not disclose the game you're asking about. A moderator may ask you to show them privately so they can explain but we ask that you don't post messages with the names of accused accounts.

As per the chat etiquette, we may indeed update it in future adding more scenarios, but for now please bear in mind that those are just a few examples and are not exhaustive. As a general rule, all communication on the site should follow the general idea of being nice and respectful towards everyone.

Aha, so there we have it. I guess lichess just wants you to act towards others the same way you'd want to be treated - in a respectful and friendly manner, showing as much understanding as you can and having no mal intent.
There still are questions however - but those are for another time and another place.