undefined | Better HN

0 pointsgmiller1234563y ago0 comments

    I am limited in what I can say without explicit permission from Niemann

What? I'd like him to explicitly state what rule/law/agreement prevents him from saying more. He explicitly accused him of cheating. I can't imagine what would prevent him from providing details.

0 comments

6nf3y ago

Magnus owns 20% of Chess.com. Chess.com put out a statement basically saying 'we have sent Hans evidence that he cheated more than the two times he admitted to'

Chess.com / Magnus is waiting for Niemann to respond.

gmiller123456OP3y ago

I'm not asking people to guess, I'm asking him to either commit to some allegations (with evidence) or to explain why he can't.

denlekke3y ago

chess.com said they haven't provided Carlson with their list of detected cheaters or any info on the cheating detection system

lcnPylGDnU4H9OF3y ago

Slander / libel laws, I would imagine. It seems like he was more careful in his phrasing than to make an explicit accusation.

cmeacham983y ago

My guess is some sort of FIDE dispute process that binds both parties to (partial) secrecy.

djrockstar13y ago

FIDE already put out a statement saying they know nothing about this incident and want Carlsen to put forward initial evidence for them to start an investigation. Carlsen's statement shows that he has no evidence beyond his feelings over the board and Hans' history of cheating online.

fotta3y ago

I'd guess it's some sort of legal litigation.

bombcar3y ago

I expect it's GDPR-covered or similar cheating examples from chess.com or whatever site it was that he saw all the list of cheaters from.

djrockstar13y ago

Chess.com already put out a statement saying Carlsen has not seen anything about their cheat detection or their list of known cheaters.

gizmo3y ago

GDPR??? Not at all related.

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse

0 pointsgmiller1234563y ago0 comments

    I am limited in what I can say without explicit permission from Niemann

What? I'd like him to explicitly state what rule/law/agreement prevents him from saying more. He explicitly accused him of cheating. I can't imagine what would prevent him from providing details.

0 comments

6nf3y ago

Magnus owns 20% of Chess.com. Chess.com put out a statement basically saying 'we have sent Hans evidence that he cheated more than the two times he admitted to'

Chess.com / Magnus is waiting for Niemann to respond.

gmiller123456OP3y ago

I'm not asking people to guess, I'm asking him to either commit to some allegations (with evidence) or to explain why he can't.

denlekke3y ago

chess.com said they haven't provided Carlson with their list of detected cheaters or any info on the cheating detection system

lcnPylGDnU4H9OF3y ago

Slander / libel laws, I would imagine. It seems like he was more careful in his phrasing than to make an explicit accusation.

cmeacham983y ago

My guess is some sort of FIDE dispute process that binds both parties to (partial) secrecy.

djrockstar13y ago

fotta3y ago

I'd guess it's some sort of legal litigation.

bombcar3y ago

I expect it's GDPR-covered or similar cheating examples from chess.com or whatever site it was that he saw all the list of cheaters from.

djrockstar13y ago

Chess.com already put out a statement saying Carlsen has not seen anything about their cheat detection or their list of known cheaters.

gizmo3y ago

GDPR??? Not at all related.

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse