yearly classical has been rigged?

Minor issues??
You base your arguments on "What if's". "What if a player is paired with the same player 3 times?". This is not the way swiss or round robins are paired. The statement immediately refutes any argument made at your end.

@mdinnerspace: ok, glad to see you reply to the main thread issue, but a few questions:
1. what do you mean with "you are paired only once" when talking in general about tournament play?
2. if you then are willing to reply the main thread, then why not tackle all 4 situations I described and the possible different outcomes?

If the rules are defended and these situations have no effect, then I am the first to say I was wrong and the rules are fair - but if not, then doing nothing has the same if not better result.

@mdinnerspace: one advise to you, if you got problems with issues that have nothing to do with the thread's subject, then reflect your personal feelings in a private message to that person, instead of public ruining the thread, as I notice you do in a lot of posts. If you like to reply to threads so much, then do it according to what people expect from the thread, even if you disagree they are posting the thread - that is your personal opinion!

Sometimes a "lucky break" can determine the outcome, a winner of a tournament. May be a walk over, may be a DQ. , maybe an agreed to draw to secure 2nd place. These things happen. It is part of the way things are. Acccept the results of the tournament. Shouting "foul" never works, is counter-productive. The system in place has been tried and proven best. No system is perfect. Get over it.

"Doing nothing" is never a solution. Sticking your head in the sand is the easiest cop-out invented.
Don't like the outcome? Suggest a better method.

@lovlas

Why was a certain GM streamer allowed to play a past yearly tournament, openly discussing moves with his IM buddy on stream?

---

From Terms of Service, User Conduct and Fair Play:

"Cheating is defined as using anything other than your own knowledge to play against another user, and gives you an advantage. [...] Having another player give you advice on what to play will also be considered cheating. "

---
Also from Terms of Service, User Conduct and Fair Play:

"Lichess maintains the right to change these definitions as they see fit and to apply bans following the judgment of the administration team."

Is it really out of the question that tournaments can be rigged, given that a player was openly allowed to cheat? Perhaps Lichess "changed a definition" this time too.

That wasn't in the ToS at that time IIRC. We weren't aware of the problem but updated our policies after we became aware of the problem. Thats how rules work everywhere. It is dynamic and has to change with the times.

Its time to take of your tinfoil hats. No one has anything to gain from rigging lichess tournaments. I can say with 100 % certainty that the tournament wasn't rigged or tampered with in any way. This is just getting silly.

@lovlas

It definitely was in the ToS at the time. A thread was started that pointed out the hypocrisy, quoting that same part of the ToS. Thibault even publicly endorsed this cheating, saying it was "educational".

If I am not mistaken the second part of that sentence was added later.

You guys sure love to make big drama out of anything. Why can't we just enjoy chess?

@lovlas

You are mistaken.
But it's okay. I understand.

Have a good day.

That's possible. Even if the rule where there the it wasn't understood the same way it is now. Doing educational streams or streams with multiple persons is a recent thing. I am not sure how that case in any way would show that we are hypocrites. We aren't a big bad company that edit or adjust things to fit our narrative. We are volunteers that love chess.