Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Lichess will no longer cooperate with the USCF and the Saint Louis Chess Club

lichess.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 160 posts

Re: Lichess will no longer cooperate with the USCF and the Saint Louis Chess Club

#121

Post by acomjean »

ajkjk wrote: post #26
COGlory wrote: post #5

I'm confused what Lichess wanted here. One woman complained. USCF assigned her an escort. More women complained. USCF banned the guy. This sounds completely reasonable, unless the first woman provided proof, you can't just ban someone because of an allegation. But they took steps to ensure her safety at future events. What does Lichess want here? They say it's insufficient, but they never really say what should have…

What are you talking about? There are like... a thousand things that could have done better here, and which were still being done long after the complaints. Ban the people. Completely totally remove the people who are assaulting underage girls from any event and any association. Don't "provide an escort", wtf. Ban them .

You know those "code of conduct" pages you see a conferences, where you sigh and think this is obvious. Lamentably this is why you have them and you enforce them. If things get bad, people don't want to associate with your group.

PyCon has one thats pretty comprehensive: https://us.pycon.org/2023/about/code-of-conduct/

The US chess one seems out of date and frankly lacking anything to stop misbehavior outside of chess: [PDF] https://new.uschess.org/sites/default/files/media/documents/...

or the "safe play guidelines" which are a little better: https://new.uschess.org/us-chess-safe-play-guidelines

Re: Lichess will no longer cooperate with the USCF and the Saint Louis Chess Club

#122

Post by rrrrrrrrrrrryan »

tick_tock_tick wrote: post #3

One thing I'm really struggling with for all these kind of issues is do we really want to create another legal system? That's basically what every organization is being pushed into at this rate. From Universities to chess Leagues they are assembling what amounts to their own judges, juries, and prosecutors. If someone is committing sexual assault why does their seem to be this avoidance of the existing legal system a…

> From Universities to chess Leagues they are assembling what amounts to their own judges, juries, and prosecutors.

Increasingly, many legal disputes are handled through arbitration, which is literally this. There are a lot of motivations for avoiding the courts: arbitration is usually faster, cheaper, and can be more discreet. From my understanding, big entities really only take something to court when they want to rely on legal precedent or establish a new binding precedent.

Re: Lichess will no longer cooperate with the USCF and the Saint Louis Chess Club

#123

Post by Daishiman »

bluGill wrote: post #93
nickthegreek wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is about Freedom of Association, a protected right under the first amendment.

Do you really want to belong to an organization that bans based on accusations? That seems like a great way for someone dishonest to avoid playing someone they know they will have a problem beating - just accuse them of sexual harassment and you don't have to worry about it. Things like the above have been done in the past. That is why the courts have complex and slow procedures to solve problems. I hate it as well,…

Yes.

Re: Lichess will no longer cooperate with the USCF and the Saint Louis Chess Club

#124

Post by mandmandam »

nonethewiser wrote: post #115
mandmandam wrote: post #111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's difficult to interpret your comment as having any other meaning.

You can want women to feel welcome and be safe in chess without being a social justice warrior. In fact im not even sure a social justice warrior even wants that. Im not saying Lichess is SJW because they want women to feel and be safe in chess. Im saying they are a bit SJW because they infused ideaology with their totally idealogical site. Communism, atheism, feminism,etc. Of the developers own admission.

[flagged]

Re: Lichess will no longer cooperate with the USCF and the Saint Louis Chess Club

#125

Post by em-bee »

constantly wrote: post #80
em-bee wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

no it's not. it subverts the principle that someone is innocent until proven guilty. with so many associations becoming mandatory (eg: i can't do my job without a google account) we can no longer allow any organization to reject people based on their own judgement. at least for the larger ones that don't have trivial alternatives.

Innocent until proven guilty is primarily a legal principle in the United States and doesn’t really apply to the court of public opinion. And in fact for many of the good reasons presented by the person to whom you’re responding, really shouldn’t apply to the court of public opinion or the principle of freedom of association.

doesn’t really apply to the court of public opinion

i strongly disagree with that. allowing public opinion to judge people without proof leads to mob rule. any rumor can destroy someones life. as a society we must not allow that to happen.

innocent until proven guilty should apply to every interaction we have with any human being. if there are suspicions it is ok to take precautions, and obviously those who are victims should be able to seek and get support even if they can't prove what happened. but any actions against the accused must not be irreversible until a verdict has been reached.

part of the reason this is necessary is because as a society we are not doing well with forgiveness especially in cases where someone has been wrongfully accused. to many times their life has been destroyed anyways.

Re: Lichess will no longer cooperate with the USCF and the Saint Louis Chess Club

#126

Post by runako »

bluGill wrote: post #93
nickthegreek wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is about Freedom of Association, a protected right under the first amendment.

Do you really want to belong to an organization that bans based on accusations? That seems like a great way for someone dishonest to avoid playing someone they know they will have a problem beating - just accuse them of sexual harassment and you don't have to worry about it. Things like the above have been done in the past. That is why the courts have complex and slow procedures to solve problems. I hate it as well,…

> Do you really want to belong to an organization that bans based on accusations?

Are there non-government civic organizations that require accusations to be completely adjudicated in courts before ejecting a member? I have never heard of even one that would fit this description.

Re: Lichess will no longer cooperate with the USCF and the Saint Louis Chess Club

#127

Post by slowmovintarget »

tick_tock_tick wrote: post #3

One thing I'm really struggling with for all these kind of issues is do we really want to create another legal system? That's basically what every organization is being pushed into at this rate. From Universities to chess Leagues they are assembling what amounts to their own judges, juries, and prosecutors. If someone is committing sexual assault why does their seem to be this avoidance of the existing legal system a…

Every organization beyond an individual has a legal system. Whether the rules are formal or informal, defacto or defined is irrelevant, there is a legal system of some sort.

Within the family, it may not be there in writing, but Mom and Dad run the show. The rules are the ones they set for the household. The neighborhood has its norms, unspoken or baked into ordinances. The congregation has its rules, the corner store has a boss that says what goes...

If you have an organization, and it has even the slightest hint of formal governance, you have rules (laws) and a legal system. In this case, yes, chess organizations must deal appropriately with problems of sexual misconduct, including following the laws of the land. In the situations cited in the article, in particular, even if there were now criminal charges leveled, the legal system of the chess federations should have ensured that one member could not gain a position to continue preying on other members. They should do this regardless of what other supervening laws exist. Those other laws will come into play, but there does need to be governance of acceptable behavior within their sphere of concern.

Re: Lichess will no longer cooperate with the USCF and the Saint Louis Chess Club

#128

Post by moate »

altairprime wrote: post #119
moate wrote: post #117

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Oh I know, I once got into a massive Twitter blowout with Brendan Eich because he believes that all computing conferences should invite "the best" speakers (how do you determine that? well I assume "invented JS" would be a qualifier...) regardless of their personal or legal issues. It's a tough philosophical space balancing between free speech/association and criminal discrimination and I think it shouldn't be surpri…

I would change one word only here, to represent the flexibility of beliefs that typically ensues from any unfavorable interpretation thereof: > as long as it doesn’t cross a line into “ excluding them ”.

Well yea. Nothing white dudes hate more than being told women and minorities are allowed to do something they aren't (and since it appears to be just us talking here, I think we can both admit that's really all that's going on).

"Oh no, a problematic white man suffered a consequence. I'm a problematic white dude, I wouldn't want to be kicked out! This should be illegal!"

Re: Lichess will no longer cooperate with the USCF and the Saint Louis Chess Club

#129

Post by sshine »

ipython wrote: post #38
tick_tock_tick wrote: post #3

One thing I'm really struggling with for all these kind of issues is do we really want to create another legal system? That's basically what every organization is being pushed into at this rate. From Universities to chess Leagues they are assembling what amounts to their own judges, juries, and prosecutors. If someone is committing sexual assault why does their seem to be this avoidance of the existing legal system a…

The legal system is exorbitantly expensive. I had a neighbor sue me over a land dispute (yes, they’re that petty). My lawyers informed me that I was looking at $80-200k in legal bills to take even this little thing to trial. It doesn’t surprise me that organizations actively try to avoid it.

Sorry to hear that.

I lived with someone for several years who was in a legal dispute with their tenants. Once one lawsuit was over, the other part retributed. I never knew them when they were not either suing or getting sued.

It taught me this: don’t ever go to court if you can avoid it.

Re: Lichess will no longer cooperate with the USCF and the Saint Louis Chess Club

#130

Post by lamontcg »

em-bee wrote: post #125
constantly wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Innocent until proven guilty is primarily a legal principle in the United States and doesn’t really apply to the court of public opinion. And in fact for many of the good reasons presented by the person to whom you’re responding, really shouldn’t apply to the court of public opinion or the principle of freedom of association.

doesn’t really apply to the court of public opinion i strongly disagree with that. allowing public opinion to judge people without proof leads to mob rule. any rumor can destroy someones life. as a society we must not allow that to happen. innocent until proven guilty should apply to every interaction we have with any human being. if there are suspicions it is ok to take precautions, and obviously those who are victi…

> innocent until proven guilty should apply to every interaction we have with any human being.

that is ludicrous.

people are free to have red flags that cause them to cut ties with other people without clearing any evidentiary bar.

that is part of entirely healthy human behavior.

Post reply on HN