We need to make lichess community more equal.

@AQUA_9691 said in #12:
> Your answer is unrelated with this topic.

It is precisely on-point, because there is no possibility you are serious.

@Hedgehog1963 said in #21:
> It is precisely on-point, because there is no possibility you are serious.
There is. I'm stating that we need affirmative actions on lichess. I knew that some may thread this as a joke, but if you would go 19th century and say thay blacks are equal to whites, you also wouldn't be taken seriously.

Okay, at this point you are simply lying and not presenting any evidence. Simply saying "there's discrimination everywhere" is not evidence and is unhelpful.

There is little to no solid evidence of the discrimination you are claiming exists on any large scale. If you can't point to a specific situation, or statistic, that shows unequivocally that action is being taken to discriminate against some group, then you have no evidence at all.

Compensation as you call it, or "reparations" as it is often called in political parlance, is only moral if you are making reparations to a SPECIFIC individual for whom you have specific evidence of wrong doing against AND if the cost of that reparation is placed on the specific individual who did the wrong. Any other method of reparations is immoral.

Making compensations or reparations at a large scale is immoral because you will inevitably be punishing the innocent and rewarding the undeserving. In fact, that will be the case for MOST people you apply this to.

And I'm not going to take the time to get into it, but I'm going to say that you shouldn't believe someone when they tell you that "anti-racism" just means being against racism. It is a term invented by manipulative groups attempting to use race wars to accomplish their sociopolitical goals to gain power. Don't fall for their usage of it.

It's good to be against racism. However, it's not good to discriminate based on race for the sake of being "anti-racist".

Please take some time to reevaluate your morals, and decide whether or not you think it's okay to discriminate against/for entire groups of people based on things like skin color, sex, and more.

I believe that discrimination, no matter how well intentioned, is always evil.

Especially in when it comes to something so obviously fair and equal as chess.

This thread needs locked.

I would support affirmative action for dwarves in pro basketball. It should please OP and also it'd be hilarious.

@danegraphics said in #23:
> Okay, at this point you are simply lying and not presenting any evidence. Simply saying "there's discrimination everywhere" is not evidence and is unhelpful.
>
> Compensation as you call it, or "reparations" as it is often called in political parlance, is only moral if you are making reparations to a SPECIFIC individual for whom you have specific evidence of wrong doing against AND if the cost of that reparation is placed on the specific individual who did the wrong. Any other method of reparations is immoral.
>
> Making compensations or reparations at a large scale is immoral because you will inevitably be punishing the innocent and rewarding the undeserving. In fact, that will be the case for MOST people you apply this to.
>
> And I'm not going to take the time to get into it, but I'm going to say that you shouldn't believe someone when they tell you that "anti-racism" just means being against racism. It is a term invented by manipulative groups attempting to use race wars to accomplish their sociopolitical goals to gain power. Don't fall for their usage of it.
>
> It's good to be against racism. However, it's not good to discriminate based on race for the sake of being "anti-racist".
>
> There is little to no solid evidence of the discrimination you are claiming exists on any large scale. If you can't point to a specific situation, or statistic, that shows unequivocally that some group is being directly discriminated against, then you have no evidence at all.
>
> Please take some time to reevaluate your morals, and decide whether or not you think it's okay to discriminate against/for entire groups of people based on things like skin color, sex, and more.
>
> I believe that discrimination, no matter how well intentioned, is always evil.
>
> Especially in when it comes to something so obviously fair and equal as chess.
>
> This thread needs locked.

I'm not lying. If you don't believe, then read those:

www.usf.edu/compliance-ethics/equal-opportunity/ten-myths-about-affirmative-action.aspx

theconversation.com/amp/whats-behind-the-gender-imbalance-in-top-level-chess-150637

www.newsweek.com/chess-grandmaster-black-pontus-carlsson-racism-protests-1511591

amp.theguardian.com/sport/2021/nov/29/womens-chess-sexism-misogyny

www.chess.com/forum/view/general/chess-is-racist-1

> 1. People from discriminated groups should gain rating faster: this means, that after being verified as a woman, black, obese or queer person, ones rating need to be adjusted upwards to make lichess rating system fair.

> 2. Setting up maximum rating: nobody should have rating higher than 2500, the same as nobody should be a billionaire. People who have rating higher than that had were very lucky in their lifes, to be borned with predispositions to chess, and to afford expensive coaches. Allowing them to have so high rating is sinply unfair.

> 3. Possiblity to swap pieces colors in settings: there should be an option in settings to make white pieces display as black and vice versa, because the fact that white always starts endforces racist stereotypes about whote supremacy.

Did you produce all of this by yourself? Because if so you have a special talent for writing bullshit.

@Deadban said in #26:
> Did you produce all of this by yourself? Because if so you have a special talent for writing bullshit.
Yes I did by myself. This is not bullshit and I'm absolutely serious.

Nothing you cited is evidence of specific large scale discriminatory action being taken.

Who you have cited are not authorities, and depending on who you ask, may not be trustworthy.

The only evidence of discrimination in your links are individual incidents.

That has nothing to do with unjustly punishing and rewarding entire groups of people without any evidence that they did anything to deserve it.

Please take the time to reevaluate what you are asking for, and if you really do, if you really take the time to think about it, you will realize just how wrong and immoral it is.

Until you realize that, you haven't thought about it enough.

@danegraphics said in #28:
> Nothing you cited is evidence of specific large scale discriminatory action being taken.
>
> Who you have cited are not authorities, and depending on who you ask, may not be trustworthy.
>
> The only evidence of discrimination in your links are individual incidents.
>
> That has nothing to do with unjustly punishing and rewarding entire groups of people without any evidence that they did anything to deserve it.
>
> Please take the time to reevaluate what you are asking for, and if you really do, if you really take the time to think about it, you will realize just how wrong and immoral it is.
>
> Until you realize that, you haven't thought about it enough.

Just fucking read this again: amp.theguardian.com/sport/2021/nov/29/womens-chess-sexism-misogyny

So many people not taking this post seriously shows how we need these solutions.