Lichess banned atrophied

What is going on here????
Play chess!
Forget all this staff!
Banning , mods , double accounts , sandbaggers , cheaters , engines , millions of messages , quarrels ...
Calm down! You are setting no rivers on fire! We are all amateurs! Worse than the 1972 Reykjavik match!
Is anybody desperate for 20 dollars around here??

@NeverBeenTimid I think you are wrong about the trust part. Trust is not something that magically happens to exist or not. Trust is something you build, with hard labor, or demolish, with ease. You are right that we, the Crazyhouse community, are not owed an explanation by the Lichess admins. But neither the Lichess admins are owed our trust. My impression is that the Lichess admins have opted to stay silent so far, not because they don't have something to say, but because they don't trust the maturity of our community. They fear that if they give as an honest and clear explanation of their decision about Atrophied, we will panic and start burning the place or something. Do you think that such a fear is justified?

They have given you an honest and clear explanation of their decision. Incase you missed it, here it is again

" This player artificially increases/decreases their rating "

@NeverBeenTimid

> If this wasn't a streamer that was banned none of you would be campaigning for them and fighting their corner.

True. And so what? What's your point? How is this relevant in any way to the case in question?

> The mark on the account says he was sandbagging. 50+ hours of mod time, and an appeal that was submitted and declined.

I don't care if it was 150 hours. You can see that total man hours spent by people around here scratching their heads what's going on due to the moderators actions are even more than 50.

>I know many of you might have watched his streams and feel like you know the guy, but is it maybe possible - just maybe - that the people who banned him know more about the situation than you?

Maybe? We don't know. Do they know more?

>You are not owed an explanation. You either trust in this sites detection or you don't.

Yes, trust level dropped significantly these past couple of days.

> Since none of you were complaining about sandbagging markers a week ago I guess so far you have been pretty happy with it.

There was no reason to talk about it. Might as well have been just some dead rule that is never applied. First time I see someone tagged this way. Nevertheless, whatever the reason it is, we ARE talking about it, that is a fact that doesn't need to be analysed. What needs to be analysed is this rule and was there any harm actually done or if this rule needs improvement/removing.

>This is a pointless discussion now as you are going round in circles.
>He has been banned. Appeal rejected. Time to move on.

Feel free to move on

@NeverBeenTimid oh, come on! You know that this is not a clear explanation. Was he punished for berserking? For tilting? For playing the Bongcloud? For selecting underrated opponents? For resigning after the first move? For not trying to win?
Some people believe that the "explanation" is not even honest. Read the thoughts of @PhillipTheTank at #72 and #89.

@NeverBeenTimid it looks like you can't see the difference between the statement and explanation:

This is a statement: "This player artificially increases/decreases their rating". It does not explain anything, it just states: 'we think this is what happened'.

Is there even an set of rules somewhere here which describes exactly why it happens? Do you see any explanation how exactly he increased/decreased the rating?

" This player artificially increases/decreases their rating "

If Atophied was:

A. suffering depression;
B. Had a cold; or
C. Ate the wrong food.

he may go through a bad patch when his performance drops.

This is the same for any sports person.

It is impossible to judge whether he artificially increases/decreases his rating.

Does the person/moderator making the decision have a problem with a lack of empathy? I am sure they are very clever, but autistic/aspgeners people can be the cleverest but lack the empathy to make a sensible decision.

My vote is reinstate Atophied, he is a great ambassador for the game.

@NeverBeenTimid ok I will say I don't trust lichess detection.

idk.. i play with kids around sometimes which is blunderfantastic and +1 difficulty. I never got flagged for rating going up and down.. It was even as much as like 1800 up to 2150.. a pretty big spread.

@Skeftomilos The answer is yes because of this:

"They have given you an honest and clear explanation of their decision. Incase you missed it, here it is again"

" This player artificially increases/decreases their rating "

Sad.