Penal code Section 222. False accusation

@Daodejing

I've said from the start that Magnus was completely off base in this --- it's simply not right to insuate that someone is cheating without PROOF, and wounded pride is no proof at all.

"I'm so great, nobody can beat me without cheating" is the kind of pride based ego trap that we *all* have to avoid, it's wrapped up in human nature.

On the other hand, if you actually have proof to support an accusation of cheating, proof that would pass muster in a court of law, then don't pussyfoot around, don't skulk in the shadows with sly insuations, thump your evidence down on the table for all to see and evaluate!

@daodejing removed their quoted post

Doesn't one have to prove malicious intent for defamation?

Bit of an overreaction on your part, I think.

@bigdogg said
Doesn't one have to prove malicious intent for defamation?

Bit of an overreaction on your part, I think.

Post alerted for making a valid point. 😆

@bigdogg said
Doesn't one have to prove malicious intent for defamation?

Bit of an overreaction on your part, I think.

Depends on the jurisdiction, I think. In some places, defamation requires intent; in others, it only requires an obvious lack of care.

@daodejing removed their quoted post

Magnus Carlsen is a young man with an ego like the rest of us, he probably made a false accusation borne of anger over an unexpected loss. A mistake on his part, no doubt, but hardly a situation to start quoting the Penal Code, so let's keep this in perspective, shall we? 🙂

The backlash against Magnus seems to be a sort of top-dog syndrome. People love to shoot down the person on top and root for the under dog.

Magnus has not made any direct accusations of cheating nor has he been talking trash about anyone. Despite this, all of his detractors, like on this thread, grossly exaggerate his actions as "going crazy" or other hyperbolic nonsense.

I agree that there is no hard evidence of cheating from Niemann but that doesn't mean Magnus doesn't have the right to suspect something. Niemann is a self-confessed cheater who has been caught twice and banned for it. This puts Niemann's meteoric rise under from a 2400 to 2700 player under scrutiny, since this jump happened in just one year, accomplished by beating the highest-ranked 2800 player off all time while Nieman was still ranked in the 2600s.

Add to this that Niemann's coach has also been caught cheating and banned from the same website Niemann was banned from. A confessed cheater aligned with a coach who was also banned for cheating makes Magnus' suspicions quite reasonable.

Naturally, none of this means that Neimann's game against Magnus was definitely a result of unscrupulous play...but given the circumstances around Neimann there's no reason to completely rule it out either. Yes, he's innocent until proven guilty and shouldn't be banned from play unless there's more of a smoking gun, but that doesn't mean Magnus doesn't have the right to at least voice concern.

Potentially destroying careers or drastically reducing revenue by making a false accusation without any proof could be costly for Magnus. Here is the objective analysis:
YouTube&t=684s

@daodejing said
Potentially destroying careers or drastically reducing revenue by making a false accusation without any proof could be costly for Magnus. Here is the objective analysis:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cf1FZvHwX1A&t=684s

What's with all the deleting of your own posts?

@bigdogg said
What's with all the deleting of your own posts?

Trying not to get banned again, perhaps?

I cannot be banned - because I am only a chess author.
Kasparov, with whom I had the pleasure of coming into personal contacts a long time ago, obviously shares my opinion:
Talking about the happenings related to the Carlsen – Niemann case and the game in which Niemann defeated Carlsen at the Sinquefield Cup, Kasparov said: “I was in Saint Louis. I spoke to people who were involved directly in this case. I don’t see an evidence that could be convincing... I understand his frustration, but leaving the tournament is unacceptable. Even if he had proof, but there was no proof, there is zero evidence (of cheating) in that specific game. It was really bad for chess. It was bad for Saint Louis. This was one of the most important tournaments, if not the most important tournament, in the world of chess. And I think that his behavior was unacceptable“.
https://www.chessdom.com/garry-kasparov-carlsens-behavior-was-unacceptable/

@Daodejing
Aha, thumbs down for Kasparov?! :-) For political reasons?