I've never had anything against chess.com, and I used to be a premium member but have since moved to lichess. I think that the chess world could do with more m

I've never had anything against chess.com, and I used to be a premium member but have since moved to lichess. I think that the chess world could do with more money so I have nothing against a site providing a revenue stream, even if their actual aim is to profit themselves. It would be disappointing if chess.com are engaged in clandestine anti-lichess behaviour. There might already be some information out there that I'm not aware of. Hikaru is the biggest name in chess streaming. If he's signed an exclusivity contract with chess.com that would be unfortunate, but whatever it's just one person. If chess.com have started to to add exclusivity into all of their streamer contracts then that would be much more unfortunate. It's seems likely that they do have other exclusivity contracts, perhaps Gotham or the Botez sisters. Although you could argue that "they have the right", by a similar vein we have the right to hold it against them. > It works the other way too: Wen did you last see Magnus play on Chess.com? Actually, I don't get your point here. Ideally players would be free to make their own decisions on an ongoing basis, which is what we assume Magnus is doing.