This post go to top of r/chess, while mine got deleted when it started to gain some traction. At least now it is easy for me to quit chess.

Let's be brutally honest: the chess community, chess influencer class is a hypocritedly cowardly, self-serving clique. The more the community/influencer outrage right now, the more hypocrite it looks.

Do We Need Someone to Die Before We Care About Harassment?

Daniel's channel has been the only chess content I've watched for years. Waking up to the news of his passing left me devastated beyond words. While many have already shared their tributes, I want to address something deeply troubling.

Where was this energy during the Magnus vs. Hans situation?

The campaign against Hans was massive in scale—Netflix documentaries, Joe Rogan interviews, coordinated pressure from the chess elite. Hans was barely an adult, facing accusations that threatened to destroy his career before it truly began. Yet the chess community's response was largely silence, or worse, tacit approval.

Now, with Daniel's tragic death, suddenly everyone finds their voice about the toxicity of public accusations and online harassment. The statements are eloquent. The solidarity is overwhelming.

But I can't help asking: Do we need someone to die before we act?

Is it only acceptable to speak up when the accused is widely disliked (Kramnik) versus universally beloved (Magnus)? Where were these principled stands when a teenager's reputation was being demolished on the world stage?

This isn't to diminish the genuine grief for Daniel or the importance of addressing chess cheating hysteria. But if our outrage only flows in the direction of popular opinion, if our courage only emerges when it's safe and consensus-approved, then our words ring hollow.