Remind me again why lichess is involved in this? Isn't this public shaming? Is like talking about someone cheating in public forum. NOT THE RIGHT PLATFORM AND FORUM according to lichess's rules.
My take:
unless its proven in a court of law the person is innocent.
and
whatever top players do outside tournaments cannot be the responsibility of any organisation.
Im sure these men a guilty. These women didnt make this up I would think. So take them to court.
But in the end you can not treat them as guilty until its proven.
unless its proven in a court of law the person is innocent.
and
whatever top players do outside tournaments cannot be the responsibility of any organisation.
Im sure these men a guilty. These women didnt make this up I would think. So take them to court.
But in the end you can not treat them as guilty until its proven.
While lichess is taking a side in this discussion, it does not come off as political or ideological to me. This is disassociating from groups not taking sufficient actions in response to the scandal.
I'm pretty neutral on this thread as this is fully in lichess' rights and the issues are concerning actually. It's directly chess-related involving many chess personalities and is about a legitimate scandal. I don't see the controversy about lichess taking a stance.
What I do hope is that some kind of lawsuit is filed against offenders and justice is served. I don't know why any of the victims are talking on Twitter about the allegations many months later without a proper suit. Is the goal here to gather more support or more victims who are closeted currently?
They should file one if they truly believe what they're saying and have sufficient evidence. Every sane person wants criminality punished here. Have some courage victims. The only justice here is the one you can make happen, both on Twitter and in the court of law more importantly.
I'm pretty neutral on this thread as this is fully in lichess' rights and the issues are concerning actually. It's directly chess-related involving many chess personalities and is about a legitimate scandal. I don't see the controversy about lichess taking a stance.
What I do hope is that some kind of lawsuit is filed against offenders and justice is served. I don't know why any of the victims are talking on Twitter about the allegations many months later without a proper suit. Is the goal here to gather more support or more victims who are closeted currently?
They should file one if they truly believe what they're saying and have sufficient evidence. Every sane person wants criminality punished here. Have some courage victims. The only justice here is the one you can make happen, both on Twitter and in the court of law more importantly.
@SnowMan2018 said in #18:
> Do I understand it right that Lichess supports the "guilty until proven innocent" line of thinking when it come to SA allegations?
Innocent until proven guilty applies to legal matters, not social matters. Ramirez should not be imprisoned unless he's proven guilty, but he definitely deserves to be thought of by us as "very likely to be guilty."
There's testimony from more than 10 different women, plus other people who were aware of his behavior despite not being victims themselves. There are text messages, there are years of written complaints, etc. It seems overwhelmingly likely that Ramirez actually did what he's accused of.
Do you really think Lichess did the wrong thing by publicizing this? I think they did the right thing. And the chess organizations that cut ties with Ramirez probably should have done so even sooner than they did. You do not need proof beyond a reasonable doubt to fire someone.
> Do I understand it right that Lichess supports the "guilty until proven innocent" line of thinking when it come to SA allegations?
Innocent until proven guilty applies to legal matters, not social matters. Ramirez should not be imprisoned unless he's proven guilty, but he definitely deserves to be thought of by us as "very likely to be guilty."
There's testimony from more than 10 different women, plus other people who were aware of his behavior despite not being victims themselves. There are text messages, there are years of written complaints, etc. It seems overwhelmingly likely that Ramirez actually did what he's accused of.
Do you really think Lichess did the wrong thing by publicizing this? I think they did the right thing. And the chess organizations that cut ties with Ramirez probably should have done so even sooner than they did. You do not need proof beyond a reasonable doubt to fire someone.
What exactly does this mean for regular Lichess users? Will we see any substantial changes in Lichess itself?
Visit chess.com/ and stick to them.
This is an excellent and well justified measure.
@Energia360 said in #161:
> What exactly does this mean for regular Lichess users? Will we see any substantial changes in Lichess itself?
You will not see SLCC events such as Sinquefield cup, American Cup, etc. as featured broadcasts.
> What exactly does this mean for regular Lichess users? Will we see any substantial changes in Lichess itself?
You will not see SLCC events such as Sinquefield cup, American Cup, etc. as featured broadcasts.
@peshka2 said in #164:
> You will not see SLCC events such as Sinquefield cup, American Cup, etc. as featured broadcasts.
Thanks.
> You will not see SLCC events such as Sinquefield cup, American Cup, etc. as featured broadcasts.
Thanks.
@Ferdosco said in #162:
> Visit chess.com/ and stick to them.
I feel like chesscom's better, but only for people with subscriptions. For the F2P audience, Lichess is much better than the ad-filled, restricted website that is chesscom.
> Visit chess.com/ and stick to them.
I feel like chesscom's better, but only for people with subscriptions. For the F2P audience, Lichess is much better than the ad-filled, restricted website that is chesscom.
This topic has been archived and can no longer be replied to.