7 ms·
As someone who plays exclusively on Lichess I find the chess.com bashing, particularly here on HN, a bit short-sighted, in the sense that it's focussed on who p
by Pyramus 3y ago
As someone who plays exclusively on Lichess I find the chess.com bashing, particularly here on HN, a bit short-sighted, in the sense that it's focussed on who provides the better (free) online service to play chess.
If your goal, however, is to popularise the game of chess, i.e. to get more people to play chess, a free online service is only a necessary condition. Chess.com seems to be able to sponsor and organise tournaments, pay content creators/chess players, offer live streams with professional commentators, etc. But also take legal responsibility and stand up to lawsuits.
Interested to hear your thoughts on this. I don't see Lichess being able to provide this type of value, and I'm not sure if they want to or should.
- aoeusnth1 3y agoI think both chess.com and lichess are positive influences on the chess scene. We need a corporate presence to be able to organize tournaments, find sponsors, and support streamers. That said, I prefer lichess and think most people should be using it. But I understand it’s not about the platform’s technical features; for most people, it’s about the network effect with their friends.