Round 5

One important piece of information is that Magnus Carlsen has confirmed (once again) that he has no intention to play the Candidates, so the other three semifinalists, including underdog Nijat Abasov, should be directly qualified for the Candidates.

Link to the document (which is also linked in the article).

The article has a couple of inaccuracies and unjustified assumptions:

First of all, there is no Men’s category in chess, only Open and Women’s. The Open category is, as indicated by its name, open to everyone, men, women, cis, trans and anyone else, and it is not unusual that women compete in it (the most prominent case was Judit Polgar). This new FIDE document doesn’t change that, so a trans person is allowed in competitive play, contrary to what the title suggests. The Women’s category is restricted to only women, and this document explains how these restrictions are applied to trans people. Note that the existence of a Women’s category is controversial on its own.

Similarly, there are not Men titles and Women titles, only General titles (Grand Master, International Master,…) and Women titles (Women Grand Master, Women International Master,…), with the Women titles having lower requirements (again, very controversial). All the top women players are GMs, not WGMs. The FIDE document states that trans men will have their women titles abolished (unless they transition back), but they retain their general titles, and in case they don’t have one, their women title will be transferred to the general title of the equivalent level. The article incorrectly states that trans men “are set to be stripped of any titles if they were won pre-transition”.

Now, to the meat of the topic: the eligibility of trans women for the Women category:

Article 2.3 states that any person who has legally transitioned can certificate so to their National Rating Officer to change their gender in FIDE’s database. Once that that change in the database is done, trans women are restricted from Women events until a decision is made by FIDE Council “at the earliest possible time”. In these cases where the transition is backed up by legal documents, the decision by FIDE should be a formality and take little time.

Of course, this is only possible for countries who recognize gender changes. In case the National Rating Officer rejects the change, article 2.4 allows an appellation to the FIDE QC, and after that to the FIDE Council. In these cases the decision by the FIDE Council may take up more time, and FIDE sets a deadline of two years for that decision (but it doesn’t mean that every case will take two years).

And finally, just to be clear, all of this only applies to trans players who need to change their gender in FIDE’s database. Trans players that always have played under their post-transition gender, or that have changed their gender before this regulation, don’t need to go through this process. This is the case, for example, of Yosha Iglesias, the player mentioned in the article, and that is listed as female in FIDE’s database, and consequently she can play in any Women’s event she wants.

All in all, I think there is much unnecessary red tape, especially for the trans people more at risk, those who live in countries where they are persecuted. And that the excessive red tape is most likely based on transphobia. But the situation is not as extreme as many other sports that have directly banned the participation of trans players.

https://www.chess.com/news/view/fide-world-cup-2023-round-1-1

Begun, the AdBlocker Wars have.

The word you’re looking for is sustainable, not profitable

Some people, like Elon Musk, want us to believe that social networks are a “digital town square”, but imo that’s a pretty poor metaphor. Social networks are more similar to “digital pubs”. They are places where you go to meet, chat and share with your people. Of course it is a public place, and anyone can listen to your conversations, and in principle, even join. But social networks, as pubs, and as any other human interaction, are governed by (mostly unwritten) social contracts, codes of conduct and etiquette. You are not supposed to join a conversation uninvited, and if you are invited, you are supposed to treat the others with respect.

However, these groups systematically and purposely violate the social contracts, they hijack spaces and conversation where they were not invited and insult, harass and harm anyone who doesn’t think like them or simply if they find it funny. They are the drunkards that instigate bar fights. And as in real life, the owners don’t want disruptive elements in their pubs.

At this point, the Internet is 40 years old, and mass-adoption happened more than 20 years ago. Most of us have been part of many communities before lemmy and/or kbin. And the disruptive elements are always the same. There are many groups of people with different opinions on religion, social issues, economical policies, etc, and yet only the far-right insists on the on-line persecution of their opponents. And their strategy works as long as the apologist support them.

This isn’t a matter of echo chambers. You can hear many different voices on lemmy/kbin. The only requirement to have you voice heard is basic respect, and that is something that the far-right refuses to do.

Antichess, the truly anarchic variant, where en passant is really forced

You still haven’t addressed my point. Do you think it is desiderable that homosexual people are beaten to a pulp? Is a YES/NO question, it shouldn’t be difficult to answer.

Whatever, I copied your whole paragraph in another comment, and the context is pretty clear for anyone who cares to read it. I didn’t claim that you personally were threatening to do the beating, only that you thought that the beating was desiderable for the “program of western civilization”. If you really don’t want homosexual people to be beaten to a pulp, then you should seriously reconsider how you express your ideas.

You are longing for the times when “Homosexuals were regularly taken outside and beaten to a pulp”. Isn’t this hateful?

I don’t usually go to through other people’s comment history, but this one is a goldmine

“It made sense back when everyone was, more or less, on board with the program of western civilization. We may not all have been Christian back then, but almost all of us were, and everyone supported Judeo-Christian values without question. Homosexuals were regularly taken outside and beaten to a pulp, so it was extremely rare for anyone to think such behavior was acceptable. At this point we need to ask ourselves what the purpose of freedom is. Are we a free people so we can exercise perverted pleasures of the flesh, the slaughter of innocent babies, and genital mutilation of children without their parents knowledge? If you answer “yes”, you just might be repeating the whisper of a demon.”

“woke neo-marxism claims that any normal person is bad. That means its practitioners openly discriminate against conservative white Christian men, especially if they practice heterosexual behavior in a traditional marriage.”

“Ironically, secession is about the most American thing we could do at this point”

What a sad day. Reddit is doing PiPi in their pampers.

Then, we’ll wait for that random-ass user to actually subscribe to any new sub/community over there, which they’ll only do if it’s any good

[citation needed]

Standings

Match 10

1. Nepo vs Aronian 1/2-1/2
2. Abdusattorov vs Yu 1-0
3. Radjabov vs Wei 0-1
4. Tan vs Lagno 1/2-1/2
5. Batsiashvili vs Dzagnidze 1-0
6. Sadhwani vd Bjerre 0-1

Match score: 8-10

Triveni Continental Kings gets 3 MPs

Match 9

1. MVL vs Duda 1/2-1/2
2. Grischuk vs Mamedyarov 1/2-1/2
3. Vidit vs Dubov 1/2-1/2
4. Koneru vs Kosteniuk 1/2-1/2
5. Harika vs Shuvalova 1/2-1/2
6. Sindarov vs Nihal 1/2-1/2

Match score: 6-6

Both teams get 1 MP

Match 7

1. Aronian vs Carlsen 1/2-1/2
2. Yu vs Gukesh 1-0
3. Wei vs Erigasi 1/2-1/2
4. Lagno vs Krush 1/2-1/2
5. Dzagnidze vs Paehtz 1/2-1/2
6. Bjerre vs Pragg 0-1

Match score: 7-8

SG Alpine Warriors gets 3 MPs

Match 8

1. Anand vs Nepo 1/2-1/2
2. Rapport vs Abdusattorov 1/2-1/2
3. Domínguez Pérez vs Radjabov 1-0
4. Hou vs Tan 0-1
5. Khotenashvili vs Batsiashvili 1-0
6. Esipenko vs Sadhwani 1-0

Match score: 11-6

Ganges Grandmasters gets 3 MPs

Only the landed gentry is allowed to use the medieval spelling