lichess.org
Donate

A first time Grandmaster Titled Arena winner and Nakamura's forbidden platform.

#43
I just don't get why they play on chess.com to begin with. I guess its that chess.com pays them money to do so? So instead of legitimately being the best chess site, they have to bribe people and try to enforce contracts disallowing competitors. Or maybe they give them some exclusive rights when it comes to advertising their content on their site.

It just seems so sad. In spite of what the author believes there is clearly some kind of rivalry between chess.com and lichess. I don't think they consider themselves charities, maybe lichess does in that it is truly open source. But chess.com seems like a business...and I think they are doing whatever they can to gain an edge over their competitors.
#44
I do believe that chess.com is a good website to play chess. But Lichess is just better. Coming from experience chess.com is very laggy. Lichess isn't! Chess.com takes about 0.1 seconds before you could move whereas Lichess isn't. The website of chess.com is very buggy aswell.
Although chess.com does come up with useful tool such as the video courses and the analysis tool. But overall the gameplay experience is better for Lichess.
PS: I hope Lichess starts video courses aswell! If no one does I'll do it
#45
@Spider_hip said in #38:
> I really tried chess.com couple of times but it's like a website which is developed like especially for NOT to enjoy chess. They're trying to renew it but it's really awful. Even tho if they give me platinium ultra mega membership forever, I wouldn' play there.
>
> Lichess is a masterpiece as web development. Chess.com is like a torture for me. I think they would loose at least %50 of members to lichess if peep have known lichess. Unfortunately there are lot still doesn't even know that lichess exists.

I've had a chess.com account since 2010 and it's always annoyed me how lots of useful stuff like puzzles and lessons are all behind annoying paywalls. Lichess to me feels more streamlined and quick, while chess.com is more noob friendly and social media-ish.
#47
I don't dislike Chess.com user interface but aside from that everything there is just a parody of a broken American system.
The entire website is like satire, a flawed and fundamentally soulless greedy business trying to entirely privatize Chess. They don't love Chess, all they love is your money and taking as much of it as possible and that's pretty obvious.

Morally, there's nothing, the word morals means nothing to them and their ethics as a business are very low, shady practices, lying without any guilty conscience aren't foreign to certain individuals there and everything they say online is just to keep up appearances and their public image intact.

It's honestly disgusting, makes me want to vomit how someone can live their life like that, like a greedy goblin trying to swallow down as many stacks of dollars as possible.
#48
@Shone_RL said in #47:
> I don't dislike Chess.com user interface but aside from that everything there is just a parody of a broken American system.
> The entire website is like satire, a flawed and fundamentally soulless greedy business trying to entirely privatize Chess. They don't love Chess, all they love is your money and taking as much of it as possible and that's pretty obvious.
>
> Morally, there's nothing, the word morals means nothing to them and their ethics as a business are very low, shady practices, lying without any guilty conscience aren't foreign to certain individuals there and everything they say online is just to keep up appearances and their public image intact.
>
> It's honestly disgusting, makes me want to vomit how someone can live their life like that, like a greedy goblin trying to swallow down as many stacks of dollars as possible.

The good that they do is they sponsor streamers and events that otherwise would have no funding.

If you want to see real greedy goblins, you should go into finance for that.
#49
@NoJoke said in #21:
> Any charity that thinks they have competitors is a bad charity, or perhaps it would be more accurate to say that they aren't a charity at all.
>
> The point of a charity is not to raise money, that's called a business. If your charity feeds the poor, other people feeding the poor should be your allies, not your enemies.

As much I like to believe that, it's also quite common these days that there are some businesses using the tag of a 'charity' in disguise while functioning as full blown money making organizations with highly suspect ulterior motives, so it's not a surprise at all.

I'm not including Lichess in this btw, but merely stating a point that there are quite a handful of such companies, who are indeed making it a competition even within the charity domain, so the dynamics and purpose of it have long been changed. Prefer not to name them though.

This topic has been archived and can no longer be replied to.