ECF Finance Council Meeting April 2017

[benedgell]

For option d, 25% was preferred to 50%. 25 to 5 on hand vote.

[benedgell]

We got cookies and chocolate milk during the break. Glad I gave up my Saturday now.

[benedgell]

We're doing so well time- wise that we're stuck filling time until the results are announced.

[Carl Hibbard]

We got cookies and chocolate milk during the break. Glad I gave up my Saturday now.

Thanks Ben.

[benedgell]

Discussing which pub to go to after the meeting. Phil Ehr is putting £50 behind the bar.

[John Reyes]

Option 3 for 119 against 84

[benedgell]

OMOV results:

Option 1. 12 for 191 against. Option 2. 15 for 188 against. Option 3. 119 for 84 against, 1 abstention.

[benedgell]

Option 3 less then 75%, discussing how to proceed.

[Roger de Coverly]

Option 3 less then 75%, discussing how to proceed.

The context is that a much watered down proposal to increase individual's representation as voting rights has to get a 75% vote in favour. Bizarrely a plan to demand an annual payment from individuals as a condition of playing chess in England only needed a 50% vote in favour. But if there isn't 75% support, is it worth anyone wasting their time drafting a detailed proposal that might fail in October?

[benedgell]

Looking like there might not be any progress on this.

[Chris Fegan]

Looking like there might not be any progress on this.

Shock,horror-who would possibly have predicted that outcome!!

What a farce- a Finance Council without any accounts and the status quo back to the 18th Century in regard to representation.

The ECF Council ploughs on regardless as the complete sick and unfunny joke that it is.

[benedgell]

We're done.

[benedgell]

Think the plan is that the ECF is going to come up with some fresh proposals for the AGM based on a different percentage increase (10% rather then 25% was bandied about). Not confident a change in percentage will make enough of a difference, but there were some who voted for option 1/ 2 who may vote for this instead at the AGM.

[Chris Fegan]

Think the plan is that the ECF is going to come up with some fresh proposals for the AGM based on a different percentage increase (10% rather then 25% was bandied about). Not confident a change in percentage will make enough of a difference, but there were some who voted for option 1/ 2 who may vote for this instead at the AGM.

Pathetic

[Roger de Coverly]

Not confident a change in percentage will make enough of a difference, but there were some who voted for option 1/ 2 who may vote for this instead at the AGM.

I'm not sure if there's really much of a lobby in favour of voting reform. If there was, it should name those organisations whose representatives opposed the potential reforms with a view to getting attendees at their AGMs, assuming they have them, to vote in favour of a change of policy.