If Commission reports could not be approved, what happens about title applications which were therefore not ratified?NickFaulks wrote:A roll call was taken, and I tried to keep track of who was there. It didn't seem like a small federation problem.Roger de Coverly wrote:
It's a problem which grows with every time the number of Federations in FIDE expands. The quorum required is half the number + one, so it's stretched well beyond those Federations with a respectable number of players, who might be interested in the problems of defining rules against computer cheating, awarding Academy status for junior training etc.
A lot of delegates seem to have planned to miss day four, on the grounds that it would all be over in three. They should not have done that, and should at least have organised proxies. Even so, they could hardly have foreseen the African sabotage which cost us day two or the voting shambles which cost us day three.
Kasparov vs Ilyumzhinov: the FIDE Presidency battle begins
-
- Posts: 5249
- Joined: Mon Apr 09, 2007 5:56 pm
- Location: Croydon
Re: Kasparov vs Ilyumzhinov: the FIDE Presidency battle begi
-
- Posts: 3417
- Joined: Thu Nov 08, 2012 5:17 am
Re: Kasparov vs Ilyumzhinov: the FIDE Presidency battle begi
Very successful few days for Illyumzhinov who gets rewarded by a pat on the back from his sugar daddy http://www.fide.com/component/content/a ... hinov.html
-
- Posts: 21301
- Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 2:51 pm
Re: Kasparov vs Ilyumzhinov: the FIDE Presidency battle begi
Is it now the most likely scenario to get rid of Kirsan, that someone in Russia fancies the job and whispers in Putin's ear? There's the alien story bringing discredit to Russia, but also there's a hard core of Federations including the ECF permanently opposed to a Kirsan Presidency who might be better disposed to an alternative, even if another Russian oligarch.Chris Rice wrote:http://www.fide.com/component/content/a ... hinov.html
-
- Posts: 10364
- Joined: Mon Aug 04, 2008 10:06 am
- Location: Somewhere you're not
Re: Kasparov vs Ilyumzhinov: the FIDE Presidency battle begi
When you say "sabotage", what do you mean?NickFaulks wrote: Even so, they could hardly have foreseen the African sabotage which cost us day two or the voting shambles which cost us day three.
(That's not a leading question - I'm just trying to clarify what you're saying happened, and why.)
"Do you play chess?"
"Yes, but I prefer a game with a better chance of cheating."
lostontime.blogspot.com
"Yes, but I prefer a game with a better chance of cheating."
lostontime.blogspot.com
-
- Posts: 21301
- Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 2:51 pm
Re: Kasparov vs Ilyumzhinov: the FIDE Presidency battle begi
You might recall the affair of the Gabon since you mentioned that the President shared a surname with the ruling family. Very shortly after that, he discovered that his organisation was no longer the official FIDE affiliate and in fact was claimed to never have been so. This was not just the FIDE Office but also the Kirsan representatives in Africa claiming this. Perhaps they forgot the existence of internet archives able to prove the contrary, so the cover story for removing him and them was changed. Very dubious practice and bias by the Electoral Commission since the replacement organisation wasn't able to raise a team.JustinHorton wrote: When you say "sabotage", what do you mean?
Fast forward to the FIDE meetings and it was apparent that he was not without support. This disrupted the elections for the Continental President for Africa. In the event the meeting splintered into two with a slightly larger meeting supporting the FIDE establishment candidate who was deemed elected.
After the problems with Vice Presidencies in 2010, a revised set of rules were agreed in 2012 which have the effect of defining the order of events
-
- Posts: 8453
- Joined: Sat Jan 02, 2010 1:28 pm
Re: Kasparov vs Ilyumzhinov: the FIDE Presidency battle begi
If you take out the hyperbole, Roger's long-distance observations have reasonable correspondence with events as they happened.Roger de Coverly wrote:In the event the meeting splintered into two with a slightly larger meeting supporting the FIDE establishment candidate who was deemed elected.JustinHorton wrote: When you say "sabotage", what do you mean?
Problems started at the African Continental meeting before the election, which was taken over by Kasparov activists. I was trying to hold a conversation on the other side of the wall, but this was impossible. One voice was shouting endlessly, and they were clearly getting no business done. With hindsight, the Chairman should have called hotel security, but he did not feel like doing that. Eventually the meeting was abandoned, and GK, who appeared at that moment, went in to rally his own troops.
After the Presidential election, all Continents were required to elect their own officers. The Africans failed to do so, since among other problems they could not even agree on scrutineers, as required for a secret ballot. The ballot did not in practice need to be secret, since by then everyone knew which side everyone was on. The next morning it was reported to the GA that there was no African President, which meant under the Statutes imposed by White & Case in 2012 that no decisons could be taken. Was this part of the GK master plan or just a happy accident? I tend to the first view, but really don't know.
Finally, after an entire lost day, the Africans tried another meeting, which was also disrupted. Ncube would presumably have won 23-17 ( forgive me if my numbers are not exact ) since he led 23 federations to another room where he was elected 23-0 in a meeting which was quorate. The Kasparov followers held their own meeting, which was not quorate, and elected their man 17-0. FIDE accepted the Ncube result, which seems fair to me.
If you want a picture of the future, imagine a QR code stamped on a human face — forever.
-
- Posts: 3417
- Joined: Thu Nov 08, 2012 5:17 am
Re: Kasparov vs Ilyumzhinov: the FIDE Presidency battle begi
I think I'd agree with that. My guess to the most likely candidate would be the new VP and President of the Russian Federation, Andrey Filatov. He's so well placed in FIDE now, with Putin's backing, I'd almost say he was being groomed for the job.Roger de Coverly wrote:Is it now the most likely scenario to get rid of Kirsan, that someone in Russia fancies the job and whispers in Putin's ear? There's the alien story bringing discredit to Russia, but also there's a hard core of Federations including the ECF permanently opposed to a Kirsan Presidency who might be better disposed to an alternative, even if another Russian oligarch.Chris Rice wrote:http://www.fide.com/component/content/a ... hinov.html
-
- Posts: 3417
- Joined: Thu Nov 08, 2012 5:17 am
Re: Kasparov vs Ilyumzhinov: the FIDE Presidency battle begi
Here are Colin Crouch's musings on the Presidential election How Kirsan outwitted Garry" which he believes was due to a combination of Kasparov's arrogance (Kasparov arrogant? Who knew?) and his adversary being a shrewder politician. I really liked Colin's final paragraph which sums it all up:
"Somehow, Ilyumzhinov has made Kasparov look like the extremist, even though Kasparov's suggestions for the future of chess seem to make a great deal of sense."
http://crouchnotes.blogspot.ae/2014/08/ ... garry.html
"Somehow, Ilyumzhinov has made Kasparov look like the extremist, even though Kasparov's suggestions for the future of chess seem to make a great deal of sense."
http://crouchnotes.blogspot.ae/2014/08/ ... garry.html
-
- Posts: 175
- Joined: Wed Jul 15, 2009 3:32 pm
Re: Kasparov vs Ilyumzhinov: the FIDE Presidency battle begi
David,David Sedgwick wrote:If Commission reports could not be approved, what happens about title applications which were therefore not ratified?NickFaulks wrote:A roll call was taken, and I tried to keep track of who was there. It didn't seem like a small federation problem.Roger de Coverly wrote:
It's a problem which grows with every time the number of Federations in FIDE expands. The quorum required is half the number + one, so it's stretched well beyond those Federations with a respectable number of players, who might be interested in the problems of defining rules against computer cheating, awarding Academy status for junior training etc.
A lot of delegates seem to have planned to miss day four, on the grounds that it would all be over in three. They should not have done that, and should at least have organised proxies. Even so, they could hardly have foreseen the African sabotage which cost us day two or the voting shambles which cost us day three.
There was a presidential board meeting the afternoon of the Thursday GA where the titles were going to be ratified. We did try calling around delegates to get proxies to try and get us Quorate but fell 10 or 11 short
-
- Posts: 175
- Joined: Wed Jul 15, 2009 3:32 pm
Re: Kasparov vs Ilyumzhinov: the FIDE Presidency battle begi
Pretty much spot on. The other problem with the second day was we didn't have enough people there to form a quorum. We did a quick head count and we were quite short when the meeting started. As for day 3. UGGGGGH 8 hours to do two elections...NickFaulks wrote:If you take out the hyperbole, Roger's long-distance observations have reasonable correspondence with events as they happened.Roger de Coverly wrote:In the event the meeting splintered into two with a slightly larger meeting supporting the FIDE establishment candidate who was deemed elected.JustinHorton wrote: When you say "sabotage", what do you mean?
Problems started at the African Continental meeting before the election, which was taken over by Kasparov activists. I was trying to hold a conversation on the other side of the wall, but this was impossible. One voice was shouting endlessly, and they were clearly getting no business done. With hindsight, the Chairman should have called hotel security, but he did not feel like doing that. Eventually the meeting was abandoned, and GK, who appeared at that moment, went in to rally his own troops.
After the Presidential election, all Continents were required to elect their own officers. The Africans failed to do so, since among other problems they could not even agree on scrutineers, as required for a secret ballot. The ballot did not in practice need to be secret, since by then everyone knew which side everyone was on. The next morning it was reported to the GA that there was no African President, which meant under the Statutes imposed by White & Case in 2012 that no decisons could be taken. Was this part of the GK master plan or just a happy accident? I tend to the first view, but really don't know.
Finally, after an entire lost day, the Africans tried another meeting, which was also disrupted. Ncube would presumably have won 23-17 ( forgive me if my numbers are not exact ) since he led 23 federations to another room where he was elected 23-0 in a meeting which was quorate. The Kasparov followers held their own meeting, which was not quorate, and elected their man 17-0. FIDE accepted the Ncube result, which seems fair to me.
(edit)
Nick, we knew the previous day there would be no African President as they announced their meeting would start at 5pm the following day. We were talking about it at the ECU vote that night (Jeff, Makro etc...)
-
- Posts: 4542
- Joined: Tue Apr 03, 2007 11:04 pm
- Location: writer
Re: Kasparov vs Ilyumzhinov: the FIDE Presidency battle begi
The GA meetings were indeed a shambles. The African meeting resulted in about one day being wasted. The voting 'system' for various elected posts wasted approximately another day. With all those people there, I calculated that it wasted approximately the equivalent of one person's life for a year.
But I don't believe there was any sabotage. It was just incompetence.
This resulted in the amendment to 11.3b in the Laws of Chess not being voted on. But the GA is supposed to vote on changes to the Laws. The idea was the change would come in on 1 September 2014. That was to enable the European winter leagues to take place with no change in the Laws mid-season. If all that fails, then the next opportunity is autumn 2015 by the Executive Board.
But I don't believe there was any sabotage. It was just incompetence.
This resulted in the amendment to 11.3b in the Laws of Chess not being voted on. But the GA is supposed to vote on changes to the Laws. The idea was the change would come in on 1 September 2014. That was to enable the European winter leagues to take place with no change in the Laws mid-season. If all that fails, then the next opportunity is autumn 2015 by the Executive Board.
-
- Posts: 8453
- Joined: Sat Jan 02, 2010 1:28 pm
Re: Kasparov vs Ilyumzhinov: the FIDE Presidency battle begi
I don't see how the EB has the power to approve an out of calendar change in the Laws. I think we're waiting for the next GA in 2016, or possibly another extraordinary GA in 2015. It's a total mess.Stewart Reuben wrote: If all that fails, then the next opportunity is autumn 2015 by the Executive Board.
Of course, one or two more years might give us the chance to improve wording which many people still don't like, and which might not pass!
If you want a picture of the future, imagine a QR code stamped on a human face — forever.
-
- Posts: 4542
- Joined: Tue Apr 03, 2007 11:04 pm
- Location: writer
Re: Kasparov vs Ilyumzhinov: the FIDE Presidency battle begi
Nick, it is a bit odd our corresponding through the EC Forum. But no matter.
I just looked up the statutes and they seem again to have changed. They definitely still say that changes in the Laws or QC regulations cannot be done by the PB. Thus 11.3b cannot be changed until 2016.
They used to say that the EB took the powers of the GA in the odd numbered years. But it no longer includes any such statement.
Another peculiarity is that the Rules Commission members are appointed by the Technical Commission. I don't even know who is now Chairman of that Commission. There were 'rows' in Tromso over territorial rights between the TC and RC.
I just looked up the statutes and they seem again to have changed. They definitely still say that changes in the Laws or QC regulations cannot be done by the PB. Thus 11.3b cannot be changed until 2016.
They used to say that the EB took the powers of the GA in the odd numbered years. But it no longer includes any such statement.
Another peculiarity is that the Rules Commission members are appointed by the Technical Commission. I don't even know who is now Chairman of that Commission. There were 'rows' in Tromso over territorial rights between the TC and RC.
-
- Posts: 175
- Joined: Wed Jul 15, 2009 3:32 pm
Re: Kasparov vs Ilyumzhinov: the FIDE Presidency battle begi
If you recall Nigel Freeman asked everyone present if there was any objection to the change (there was none) and that they would discuss in the PB that afternoon to see if they could make the change on the basis of that. We are never going to get 92 delegates to Montreal in 2015 for an EGA, will take massive amounts of proxies to do it!NickFaulks wrote:I don't see how the EB has the power to approve an out of calendar change in the Laws. I think we're waiting for the next GA in 2016, or possibly another extraordinary GA in 2015. It's a total mess.Stewart Reuben wrote: If all that fails, then the next opportunity is autumn 2015 by the Executive Board.
Of course, one or two more years might give us the chance to improve wording which many people still don't like, and which might not pass!
-
- Posts: 5249
- Joined: Mon Apr 09, 2007 5:56 pm
- Location: Croydon
Re: Kasparov vs Ilyumzhinov: the FIDE Presidency battle begi
You appear to know more than most of us about the location of next year's FIDE Congress. Can you enlighten us further?Andy Howie wrote:We are never going to get 92 delegates to Montreal in 2015 for an EGA, will take massive amounts of proxies to do it!