Chess.com should have a 0 tolerance policy for public cheating accusations

edited moderator AndrewSmith 

I agree

Valid point

I love how so many people are proclaiming their hated for Kramnik even though a decent majority of them act just like him, throwing temper tantrums in the forums and accusing people of cheating because they played a better game than they did.

Is cheating an understated problem? Yes. But is encouraging public witch hunts going to fix it? Absolutely not...especially if you're nothing more than a sore loser in denial, not unlike Kramnik.

Nah just targeted campaigns against the entire community like kramnik people can fling their mouse and yell at a brick all they want

No!
It should be an account closure

Also kinda hypocritical no hangrypiecechompy

Uh what which hunt they mostly want a ban or something anything at all would be good lol and it gets worse the more fida doesn't do something that's just normal human reaction

Yes, that witch hunt.

Unless they are trolls you can accuse trolls of cheating

Hangeypiecechomper is still in denile about him being a troll

Just because something has the potential to be misused doesn't mean it should be banned. Nobody would have caught Niemann, Tigran Petrosian, DrLupo, ect. if accusing someone of cheating was banned. Even Kramnik has been accused of cheating in the past. (see this, it's actually kinda funny: https://www.chess.com/forum/view/chess-players/kramnik-suspicious-trips-to-the-bathroom)

He probably did cheat why would he be so angry otherwise he probably lost to a bunch of people while cheating and thought they cheated to or he's just delusional or both

The argument tries to leverage emotional respect for Daniel Naroditsky to support a policy demand that isn’t directly related to him.
• Structure:
“If the platform doesn’t close accounts instantly, it shows they don’t care about Daniel Naroditsky.”
• Problem: Whether the platform enforces account closures has no logical connection to whether they care about him personally, especially after his death.
• Emotion is being used to replace causal reasoning.

⸻

🧭 2. Sub-category: Moral Leverage / False Association

It also borders on what philosophers call a false cause or moral correlation:
• It links respect for a person (a moral sentiment) with agreement on a rule (a procedural stance).
• The moral claim is used to pressure agreement — “if you disagree, you must not care about him.”
That’s coercive logic, not valid reasoning.

⸻

💔 3. Why People Do This

It usually isn’t malicious. It’s a grief-driven shortcut:
people want action that feels like honoring someone, so they connect unrelated issues to give the emotion a concrete outlet.
The intention is moral; the reasoning is flawed.

how am I a troll when I'm 2500 on this site?

Plenty of strong players are trolls

Elo doesn't stop actions

If a player truly believes another player is cheating, and they don't feel something is being done about it, then making a public accusation might be reasonable. One of the problems with this whole situation is that chess.com (and maybe other parties) probably did do a full formal investigation of Danya's games after it became a big controversy and found him innocent of cheating because he still had his account active. If chess.com made public the reviews of players who were publicly accused and said "We did an investigation and found no real evidence that x cheated" then it could stop situations like this from happening. Danya would have had clear evidence to back up his defence against skeptics, and Kramnik would have probably questioned the results and carried on - but the public would all know that it was looked into, and innocent players wouldn't have their careers tarnished so much by accusations. Maybe also fines for any players who make a certain number of public allegations that turn out to be innocent.

This is such a beautiful defense. Pretend that you don't know what "troll" means. You use it often and it works like a charm every time. Beautiful.

Of course I know what a troll is. I'm obviously not one.

Of course you know, but still you pretend that you don't know. Your comment above proves it.

Also, obviously you are a troll. All you do in these forums is abuse, mislead and mock 95% of the chess.com community. On any site with reasonable moderation you would have been banned for abuse months ago. On chess.com however trolls like you can have a free rampage.

2500 is 2500, trolling is trolling, do not mix otherwise it is like "a tomato is red" because "a hummer is heavy"