<Comment deleted by user>
Even Armenia don't recognize Artsakh and Armenia recognize Azerbaijan territorial integrity nowadays with Qarabağ . I don't understand why Lichess put fake flag to site
I've said this before.... I'm glad people are voicing out their opinions on this matter... Heck lichess even feels more politicized than chess.com
This quote is from the pride article from last year. You linked it in your blog:
"Chess, from top to bottom, is run by politicians making political decisions. Vladimir Putin wrote letters to chess federations recommending Arkady Dvorkovich for FIDE president. Narendra Modi, the Indian Prime Minister, launched the torch relay for the Chess Olympiad. Politics has been here all along. The current managing director of FIDE was minister of Economics (2014-2016) and minister of Finance (2016-2019) of the Republic of Latvia. Lichess is not an exception: the choice to provide world-class chess tools for free is political. The fact that we are a non-profit is political."
Did you not read that?
Lichess has always been political. They don't hide that.
This is thibaults github bio: "Maker of lichess.org, a hippie communist chess server for drug fueled atheists.".
You have no say about what lichess' core values are!
Why do you think you know lichess' "foundational values"? You were not involved!
You do not care that they are political.
Your problem is that they have the wrong politics (in your opinion).
I did not see you complaining about this blog: lichess.org/blog/Yie1MhIAACAAk6OQ/lichess-statement-on-the-war-in-ukraine .
But as soon as they celebrate queer lives (something you are totally indifferent about, sure thing... keep telling yourself that ) you have a problem.
btw. the "li" in lichess does stand for "freedom to leave this website". Just a hint.
"Chess, from top to bottom, is run by politicians making political decisions. Vladimir Putin wrote letters to chess federations recommending Arkady Dvorkovich for FIDE president. Narendra Modi, the Indian Prime Minister, launched the torch relay for the Chess Olympiad. Politics has been here all along. The current managing director of FIDE was minister of Economics (2014-2016) and minister of Finance (2016-2019) of the Republic of Latvia. Lichess is not an exception: the choice to provide world-class chess tools for free is political. The fact that we are a non-profit is political."
Did you not read that?
Lichess has always been political. They don't hide that.
This is thibaults github bio: "Maker of lichess.org, a hippie communist chess server for drug fueled atheists.".
You have no say about what lichess' core values are!
Why do you think you know lichess' "foundational values"? You were not involved!
You do not care that they are political.
Your problem is that they have the wrong politics (in your opinion).
I did not see you complaining about this blog: lichess.org/blog/Yie1MhIAACAAk6OQ/lichess-statement-on-the-war-in-ukraine .
But as soon as they celebrate queer lives (something you are totally indifferent about, sure thing... keep telling yourself that ) you have a problem.
btw. the "li" in lichess does stand for "freedom to leave this website". Just a hint.
Finding something offensive is never justifiable enough to implement censorship... I do not know this particuliar flag issue but it is as relevant as the sexual orientation in regards to chess : it is not! This blog was written just to bring that up it seems...
I should have guessed that a lot of people know how to read but they have lack of understanding.
Political, devisive stances just create anoyance. I am not on lichess to see political stances.
If I did not mention any previous Lichess political stance, it does not mean I agreed. I don't need to write about every political stance of Lichess.
Political, devisive stances just create anoyance. I am not on lichess to see political stances.
If I did not mention any previous Lichess political stance, it does not mean I agreed. I don't need to write about every political stance of Lichess.
It s fine if there is a many flags as possible. However what about the nazi swastika flag? If the Artsakh people are responsible for crime against humanity I would support the claim to remove the flag, as it could be considered as apology of crime against humanity, which is a crime as well.
I was not aware of the inclusion of the Artsakh flag on lichess, so this article was an interesting highlighting for me of this fact.
Unfortunately, I couldn't quite follow the arguments being made in this article end-to-end. For example, the reference to self-identification being an illogical world view is something I find confusing, as relying on something like the UN as the arbiter of statehood seems a bit abstract. The UN recognises palestine officially, for example, but far from all of the member states recognise it. So on this basis, I could see many other users making the same argument against that flag, or any of several other contested/unclear regions around the world. Yet region/nationhood has been tied to identity for centuries, well before the UN or any other modern institution, and the arguments about it have had a large bearing on the borders of nations today.
And in general, I would think allowing self-identification without exclusion (such as for Pride) is the least political stance one could take, as the alternative is not ideal either.
Thank you again for the thought-provoking article nevertheless, it was worth reading.
Unfortunately, I couldn't quite follow the arguments being made in this article end-to-end. For example, the reference to self-identification being an illogical world view is something I find confusing, as relying on something like the UN as the arbiter of statehood seems a bit abstract. The UN recognises palestine officially, for example, but far from all of the member states recognise it. So on this basis, I could see many other users making the same argument against that flag, or any of several other contested/unclear regions around the world. Yet region/nationhood has been tied to identity for centuries, well before the UN or any other modern institution, and the arguments about it have had a large bearing on the borders of nations today.
And in general, I would think allowing self-identification without exclusion (such as for Pride) is the least political stance one could take, as the alternative is not ideal either.
Thank you again for the thought-provoking article nevertheless, it was worth reading.
Vasif Durarbeyli is right, we say like him.
Clarification of Point 5: My previous statement might have been unclear. I'm not suggesting that Lichess should only add countries that are officially recognized by the United Nations. Instead, my proposal is that countries included should be recognized by nations that are themselves members of the UN, essentially meaning those widely accepted as "normal" countries. How many of those countries should recognize it is a bit debatable imo.
This is to prevent the addition of fictitious countries or minor entities, which could potentially recognize other equally non-recognized or fictitious nations. I believe this approach would maintain the credibility and user-friendliness of the platform.
This is to prevent the addition of fictitious countries or minor entities, which could potentially recognize other equally non-recognized or fictitious nations. I believe this approach would maintain the credibility and user-friendliness of the platform.
This topic is now closed.