What side of the chess spectrum are you?

Recently due to a number of factors, including COVID-19, there has been an explosion in popularity of internet chess. However, as OTB events are shut down, classical chess has become virtually nonexistent. Some people, like myself, hope classical chess comes back to us. Others are very satisfied with the shift towards online chess. This has created a large division in the chess community, among the "liberal" and "conservative" players (Making an analogy to politics). 

These are the differences between the 2 opposing views. 
My opinion is that shifting chess online has increased its player count and overall popularity, but it comes with a lot of baggage. One example that was nicely pointed out in the latest Chesslife issue is the pogchamps. Why are sub-1800 players getting paid loads of money to play low-quality blitz games? How much has chess.com pumped into this, rather than something like pro chess league or titled tuesday? Is it just because they are streamers? If so, why do they deserve to get free money despite having put no real effort into chess compared to the majority of serious players? Moreover, chess is a game of thinking and strategy. Time must be given such that each player can play to the best of his ability. In blitz chess, this is simply not the case. While it is fun, I do think elite tournaments should be kept at classical time controls. We watch those events for quality, top level chess, not time scrambles and blunders. A way to make the game more interesting is to implement something like No-Castling chess or chess 960. 

Where would you place yourself on the chess spectrum?

if 1 were liberal and 10 were conservative i think i would be a 3

proud liberal

Conservative for sure.

Liberal but I think there should be a mix of slow and fast time controls for GMs.

I'm more liberal. Ten minute games are probably the most fun to watch and play; the players get quite a bit of time to think while the game is fast enough to be gripping. 

With increment, players could play much higher quality games; you can see proof of that when Nihail Sarin converted a difficult endgame against Andrew Tang in blitz or bullet, with a one second increment. Both sides had over 95 CAPS accuracy, very impressive.

However, I do agree that pogchamps is really weird. 

5.5

Libertarian

conservative 

Liberal

I simply believe this

If we want to include the popularity of chess, make it an actual fun thing to watch, play, etc. Blitz is necessary, who watches 2 hours of a classical game? Not many people. If people watch fast chess (ie like 5 minute), they might get interested in the fast pace of the game, so they might play.

Regarding pogchamps, simple. The streamers are making the chess playerbase bigger, and without them, there would be less or less players, or it never changes.

Not good for chess, is it. Does chess deserve to be an e-sport? Sure! Just keep an equal balance of otb and e-sport. 

Liberal 100%. Down with OTB chess!

Liberal for sure. Pre-moves are OP. Watching several hour match is sleeper. zzz

Fluffy

Liberal

Conservative.

The fluffy one

Fast time controls can easily become blunderfests even at elite level. I enjoy classical the most but I have no issue with online chess or chess becoming an e-sport.

I think I lean more to the conservative side.

I don’t accept the basic premise that an individual is liberal or conservative. (Just as in the analogy of politics as stated.) I see both sides of the aisle and can accept that both are of equal value. Both can co-exist very nicely. Even without the current pandemic, real or fabricated, i could not participate in OTB games. So, the e-game realm is a true bit of fluffy unicorn-ness for me.