Kramnik’s Blog was closed

The reason is obvious - to stop the cheaters. If cheaters will see that chess.com is checking the accounts not only by default algorithms, but on another level with the help of best mathematicians, AI and so on - they will think twice before cheating.

As I mentioned before - there are anti-doping measures in sport. It is fine for all sportsmen to be checked - because it is the best way to make sport fair. 
As for cheating in chess - it is much worse than doping - it is like a 100% chances to win. How to stop this? Kramnik tries to find the way. He is not ideal, but he tries to do smth. He tries to make community think about it.

What does the community? Instead of concentrating strengths in fighting with cheaters, find better ways to do this community said that WC is pathetic, crazy, clown and so on. Chess players are so fragile - Kramnik is so bad - we are feeling so accused, let’s mute him…

Another conspiracy.

I've got to remember to buy shares in the tin foil maker's companies.

all the money that I could have made..

I'm now waiting for 2 things.

Kramnik's proof that Nakamura and the 12 year old were cheating

and

proof that I'm pro cheating.

Has Kramnik achieved anything when it comes to stop online cheating?

Chess.com has tweeted that Kramnik was wrong in the vast majority of his claims- so it seems he was right on a few.

Guess that counts as an achievement, but I don't know it it out weighs the controversy, and damage done to both the wrongfully accused, and the game's image overall.

Make up a word - "Nationist"! Should definitely (not) help your point.

It was. Kramnik said it many times. You can look it up on Levitov Chess YouTube channel if you're interested.

Why does chess.com hate Kramnik so much.

Do they?

IDK, BTW A Good Player is it...

Chess.com’s statement makes it clear they did check the games and found no evidence of cheating. I’m not sure how much detail the Chess.com Fair Play team went into to explain how they reached their conclusions to Kramnik, but clearly he wasn’t accepting it and continued his insinuations, and that’s why he has been muted - not banned, he can still play games here (including Titled Tuesdays, presumably), he just can’t post or comment in blogs, forums or messages on this platform. He can always use a different platform to publish his views - on Reddit or YouTube or whatever - just not on here. Would be interesting to see if lichess would let him say the stuff he said here over there.

For me the statement is not clear at all. Chess.com said that they did not find evidence “in the vast majority of cases”. For example If they found smth in 1 case from 100 - they should thank Kramnik for catching a cheater and improve current automatic algorithms.

Also - chess.com talks about accusations and insinuations. I do not understand why the requests for checking are equal to accusations. For me it is natural and logical and fair player should only welcome such checks instead of being accused.

The performances that Kramnik found interesting were not at all unlikely. For example, someone who actually knows how to calculate probability will tell you that Hikaru’s win streaks have close to a 98% chance of happening. If the weather report said 98% chance of rain, would you be surprised if it rains?

I do not accuse him of murder, I just insist that you investigate if he has killed his wife...

We are talking about sport. Anti-doping measures are daily routine. Anti-cheaters checks in chess should be the same. Kramnik said that anybody can check his games anytime. This statement is very reasonable - there is nothing to fear if you play fair.

If you point ot a specific performance as "interesting" in the conext of need of checking for cheating that´s at least an insinuation.

Yep. And anti-doping measures are also insinuations as we suspect a sportsman to be unfair and it is not a nice thing. May be sometimes we will find a better alternatives to keep sport fair…

Chess.com did check Hikaru's games, after Kramnik first started his public crusade against Hikaru - and declared that they found nothing suspicious.

But this response was not accepted by Kramnik. He continued to demand that Hikaru (and others) be checked more.

So it became clear that Kramnik did not simply want players' games to be better checked - he apparently suspected those players of cheating in some way, and wanted punitive action to be taken against them ...

“… and wanted punitive action to be taken against them.
He was raising the names of specific players, in the public eye, because he wanted repercussions to rain down upon those players.”

Why do you think so? I am sure that Kramnik is not a maniac and he does not want certain persons to suffer. 

Once again - He said - you can check my games any time any way you like, because I play fair. I like this position very much.

For me it is logical that any other chess player will say the same stuff - “Here are my games - please go ahead and check my games any way you like because I play fair”

 

I can see no practical way of effectively preventing cheating in online chess so it´s a moot point.