April 2016 Council meeting

[NickFaulks]

Nick has a fear that such pressure would be worse than any beneficial effect of my home league knowing what I was doing.

No, only that it might be worse and that the issue warrants more serious consideration than it was ever going to get on Saturday.

In any case, if your home league doesn't know what its representative is doing, it should ask them. If they refuse to answer, get rid of them. If they answer but you fear they are lying, what on earth were you doing when you elected such a person?

In my opinion this looks like an internal problem of the constituent members, which they should fix themselves before asking the ECF to do the job.

[Roger de Coverly]

In my opinion this looks like an internal problem of the constituent members, which they should fix themselves before asking the ECF to do the job.

Congress organisers have votes as well, but usually without any internal mechanism to deselect an incumbent.

It would be of benefit to lobbyists to know how a particular representative was voting, as they could then approach the sponsoring organisation to attempt to have the instruction changed.

The ECF President or CEO have rather less patronage available than the FIDE President so the risks of open voting are less apparent. Also there isn't the disparity of representation present in FIDE.

[NickFaulks]

Congress organisers have votes as well

I did think of that, but we know who the big ones are and they're generally not backward in making their views known.

[Mick Norris]

Don't EVER call me Mick!

[John McKenna]

Should anyone dare to call me any thing other than Michael they get very short change

About a farthing?

Here's a piece about it -

http://24carat.co.uk/farthingstoryframe.html

The use of 'short change', above, "seems rather strange!", Michael

Short change - to cheat by returning insufficient money in a transaction or to treat unfairly by witholding something of value

(Short shrift - rapid and unsympathetic treatment/curt dismissal - is the right idiom.)

[Michael Farthing]

Touché

[Mike Gunn]

At least half the current governance committee has an open mind on OMOV. If anybody wants to send me send me their proposals for OMOV (suggest about half a page of A4) I will get them discussed at a Governance Committee meeting.

[David Robertson]

At least half the current governance committee has an open mind on OMOV

More than half the Governance Committee supported its Chairman's conduct at the 2015 AGM. Not even the Chairman supported his own conduct: he resigned. Why are you still there? Why would anyone regard you as a credible or legitimate authority on matters of Good Governance in the wake of those events? Why would anyone trust your judgement on OMOV or any similar matter?

The Governance Committee should be purged and cleansed entirely, reconstituted with appropriately independent members under its new Chair. Its independence, thoroughly compromised by past behaviour, must be convincingly re-established. It should never again throw its hand in with a coup organised by a faction on the Board and their allies. Whether the current Board could tolerate such independent integrity will define whether the vested interests of its members can tolerate independent scrutiny.

[Martin Regan]

DR: to MG

More than half the Governance Committee supported its Chairman's conduct at the 2015 AGM. Not even the Chairman supported his own conduct: he resigned. Why are you still there? Why would anyone regard you as a credible or legitimate authority on matters of Good Governance in the wake of those events? Why would anyone trust your judgement on OMOV or any similar matter?

The Governance Committee should be purged and cleansed entirely, reconstituted with appropriately independent members under its new Chair. Its independence, thoroughly compromised by past behaviour, must be convincingly re-established. It should never again throw its hand in with a coup organised by a faction on the Board and their allies. Whether the current Board could tolerate such independent integrity will define whether the vested interests of its members can tolerate independent scrutiny.

David, I so like your posts. Well said.

In my day long long ago. MG was just yet another ECF voice, as he is now. If we killed all the first born chess players, before condemation he would demand a paper. A good and honest servant of the ECF, but, without doubt, part of the problem.
I have great support for the current board, the fact they haven't begged you to come back weakens that.

[JustinHorton]

There was, of course, no "coup". The members of the previous Board lost their posts because of the way they conducted themselves in office. The atmosphere they created has been a good deal more pleasant for their departure.

[Bob Kane]

Partly right Justin , It was only an attempted coup , an hideous attempt to remove the CEO mid term, followed by a concerted and successful attempt by certain Directors to manipulate the ballot in favour of "none of the above".
ex director Bob

All supported by the then Chair of Governance

[JustinHorton]

a concerted and successful attempt by certain Directors to manipulate the ballot

Keep 'em coming Bob.

[Alan Kennedy]

hideous..........manipulate..........

How does emotive language like this bring peace to the english chess federation. Have you considered the possibility that in the words of an earlier forum comment

From an esteemed friend and colleague who would prefer to remain anonymous:

In amidst all this guff about traditionalists vs. progressives and the arbiter nexus, it strikes me that Council did something rather simple. They were prepared to forgive occasional bad behaviour and incompetence, but gave short shrift to premeditated harassment and bullying either by individuals or their associates. If that is the case, Council has gone up in my estimation.

Perhaps it is time to move on from the events of last October and focus instead on increasing the numbers and enjoyment of people playing chess.

[Andrew Zigmond]

I would also refer people to an excellent blog post by Richard James which could and perhaps should have been the last word on the matter http://chessimprover.com/modernisation/

I was also of the belief that if you lost an election you took it on the chin, dusted yourself down and looked ahead to your next campaign.

[Mike Truran]

I have great support for the current board, the fact they haven't begged you to come back weakens that.

It may have been an idea to check your "facts" with the current Board before making comments like this.