It is done.
@clousems said in #375:
> [...]
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> The reason you get a third-party investigator is because it's a third party. According to the third party investigator (not USCF or Shahade), the response was "timely and appropriate". Shahade was indeed disagreeing with this analysis, but the Lichess narrative is written as though the analysis situation was made by USCF (and not a third party investigator), which paints a different picture
Who is mandating and paying the third party? The third party won't do what it has not being mandated or paid to do. How many times have we seen a government, mandating third party only to find out later that the perimeter of the mandate was let's say slightly biased. Last time I checked organizations and private companies were also doing it.
> [...]
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> The reason you get a third-party investigator is because it's a third party. According to the third party investigator (not USCF or Shahade), the response was "timely and appropriate". Shahade was indeed disagreeing with this analysis, but the Lichess narrative is written as though the analysis situation was made by USCF (and not a third party investigator), which paints a different picture
Who is mandating and paying the third party? The third party won't do what it has not being mandated or paid to do. How many times have we seen a government, mandating third party only to find out later that the perimeter of the mandate was let's say slightly biased. Last time I checked organizations and private companies were also doing it.
@ivanoff8 said in #391:
> Why would not they call the police, or start a lawsuit against the abuser, but go to chess officials? Imagine something like that in other sports. Mike Tyson did outrageous things, served a prison sentence for rape, but could not be banished from boxing. The solution is simple. In all sports, such as football, fencing, boxing, armwrestling, athletics etc, men compete with men only, women compete with women only, the same rule must be established in chess. Then there will be no sexual harassment as well as no squabbling and quarrelling. The dignity of our game must be restored in order to be on the same level with other sports.
Youre a hella nice bigot.
> Why would not they call the police, or start a lawsuit against the abuser, but go to chess officials? Imagine something like that in other sports. Mike Tyson did outrageous things, served a prison sentence for rape, but could not be banished from boxing. The solution is simple. In all sports, such as football, fencing, boxing, armwrestling, athletics etc, men compete with men only, women compete with women only, the same rule must be established in chess. Then there will be no sexual harassment as well as no squabbling and quarrelling. The dignity of our game must be restored in order to be on the same level with other sports.
Youre a hella nice bigot.
@vaibhavM8r said in #403:
> But I am not surprised given how far-left wing SLCC people seem to be. It's always a lip service about "women" but the moment that one of them is accused, it's all under the rug and no one talks about it. I learned it way before in my life being a "leftist" myself of how hypocritical and scummy these people are and they NEVER mean what they say. And they only "say" cos they get women, fame and money because they say those "magic words" of "diversity", "inclusion" and "respecting women" that make them SEEM like good guys. They will BAN a WCC challenger in an instant because he gave the wrong "opinion" (which I don't agree, but appreciate it) about a complicated war, but will NOT suspend a Child Predator even after MULTIPLE INSTANCES spanning YEARS.
What??? What is that far-lefties thing?
> But I am not surprised given how far-left wing SLCC people seem to be. It's always a lip service about "women" but the moment that one of them is accused, it's all under the rug and no one talks about it. I learned it way before in my life being a "leftist" myself of how hypocritical and scummy these people are and they NEVER mean what they say. And they only "say" cos they get women, fame and money because they say those "magic words" of "diversity", "inclusion" and "respecting women" that make them SEEM like good guys. They will BAN a WCC challenger in an instant because he gave the wrong "opinion" (which I don't agree, but appreciate it) about a complicated war, but will NOT suspend a Child Predator even after MULTIPLE INSTANCES spanning YEARS.
What??? What is that far-lefties thing?
@jose1122 said in #417:
> You are assuming an incertain premise, that the sexual assaults really occur. You just don't know, you want to believe it.
(sic)
Not as much as you want to deny it. Keep going you're so funny hombre!
> You are assuming an incertain premise, that the sexual assaults really occur. You just don't know, you want to believe it.
(sic)
Not as much as you want to deny it. Keep going you're so funny hombre!
@h2b2 said in #421:
>[...[
> what about an employer, do they have the right to fire one of their employees if there's no conviction?
According to some bigots hanging out here the answer is no.
According to them, a sponsor can't end sponsoring when PR is telling it's not good for the corporation reputation.
Even more puzzling is that they seem to believe that 2 organizations working together are compelled to do it 'till the Court of Law is telling they can chose to end it.
>[...[
> what about an employer, do they have the right to fire one of their employees if there's no conviction?
According to some bigots hanging out here the answer is no.
According to them, a sponsor can't end sponsoring when PR is telling it's not good for the corporation reputation.
Even more puzzling is that they seem to believe that 2 organizations working together are compelled to do it 'till the Court of Law is telling they can chose to end it.
@sin_kills said in #432:
> "We don't know" can cover up any crime these days. I heard it too often. And especially it hurts the victims when they experience that their accounts are rejected. Well, let's agree that we don't know, but I will believe until some other information changes my mind. Believing a victim is not a crime. Speaking as a victim is not a crime.
>
> Do you know that case where an Stanford university student raped a woman and they told her she would ruin his life and career by going to court. Fact is, that there was evidence found and they wanted her to silent anyways. It's not her who ruined his life. It's him who ruined his life by committing a crime ant this already happened and there is no turning back afterwards.
> Her name was Chanel Miller.
>
> It's kind of ugly that some "communities" try to protect their own so much that they would even protect criminals. Righteousness exalts a nation, sin is a reproach for any people. If you don't sort our evil early, these dudes become the elite, the powerful and there is only mankind to blame for it, because there are criminals and there are those who enable them by silence.
In Quebec Province of Canada a judge granted a conditional discharge to a man who pleaded guilty to sexual assault and cited concerns about the man’s career.
globalnews.ca/news/8971139/quebec-judge-sexual-assault-conditional-discharge/
What happened after the judge gave a break to the predator's career?
globalnews.ca/news/8982211/quebec-police-cuba-sexual-assault/
> "We don't know" can cover up any crime these days. I heard it too often. And especially it hurts the victims when they experience that their accounts are rejected. Well, let's agree that we don't know, but I will believe until some other information changes my mind. Believing a victim is not a crime. Speaking as a victim is not a crime.
>
> Do you know that case where an Stanford university student raped a woman and they told her she would ruin his life and career by going to court. Fact is, that there was evidence found and they wanted her to silent anyways. It's not her who ruined his life. It's him who ruined his life by committing a crime ant this already happened and there is no turning back afterwards.
> Her name was Chanel Miller.
>
> It's kind of ugly that some "communities" try to protect their own so much that they would even protect criminals. Righteousness exalts a nation, sin is a reproach for any people. If you don't sort our evil early, these dudes become the elite, the powerful and there is only mankind to blame for it, because there are criminals and there are those who enable them by silence.
In Quebec Province of Canada a judge granted a conditional discharge to a man who pleaded guilty to sexual assault and cited concerns about the man’s career.
globalnews.ca/news/8971139/quebec-judge-sexual-assault-conditional-discharge/
What happened after the judge gave a break to the predator's career?
globalnews.ca/news/8982211/quebec-police-cuba-sexual-assault/
@ShineOnMeCrazyD said in #442:
> We did multiple polls indeed and we are all in agreement with everything that is in the blog.
Thanks for giving us a nice pause of those Wooze Da Best polls. ;-)
> We did multiple polls indeed and we are all in agreement with everything that is in the blog.
Thanks for giving us a nice pause of those Wooze Da Best polls. ;-)
@hitrplan said in #451:
> Do I understand correctly that Lichess is calling on us all World to beat Ramirez to death with sticks? Or again I misunderstood something?
I think you answered the question yourself. ;-)
> Do I understand correctly that Lichess is calling on us all World to beat Ramirez to death with sticks? Or again I misunderstood something?
I think you answered the question yourself. ;-)
This topic has been archived and can no longer be replied to.