Not Sure Championship Relevance?

Details of upcoming UK events, please provide working links if possible.
David Sedgwick
Posts: 2778
Joined: Mon Apr 09, 2007 5:56 pm
Location: Croydon

Re: Not Sure Championship Relevance?

Postby David Sedgwick » Wed Feb 29, 2012 10:24 pm

Alex McFarlane wrote:I had hoped to keep out of this but recent postings make that very difficult.

Michael, you do not do yourself or your case any favours by making the comments that you do about David Sedgwick. He is as entitled to his opinion as you are. Could I suggest that you edit your last post.

John Upham wrote:I agree with Alex Ms comments entirely.

Each and every time a personal insult appears in this place (regardless of the thread) it reduces its credibility, increases its toxicity and leads to good people leaving.

Thank you both for your support.

Thank you also to Brendan O'Gorman, who sent me a sympathetic private message.

Alex Holowczak
Posts: 7886
Joined: Sat May 30, 2009 5:18 pm
Location: Oldbury, Worcestershire
Contact:

Re: Not Sure Championship Relevance?

Postby Alex Holowczak » Wed Feb 29, 2012 11:51 pm

Michael J R White wrote:Alex Holowczak has made jokes aimed at a mass of competitors, on this Forum and has continued that theme since atleast the LCC, where he put up a sign, about scoresheets.


The notice I had in London pointed to the scoresheet box. I couldn't announce that at the start of the Amateur because no such box had been created. My verbal announcement at the start of that competition was that such a box would be set up shortly. Therefore, my notice was simply bringing the aforementioned box to the players' attention. I fail to see how this is in any way a problem?

Michael J R White wrote:In his last post, he has ignored these points and denied any wrongdoing or suggestion that he has been in any way, disrespectful to players.


Correct. I maintain that I have not in any way been disrespectful to players.

Paul Cooksey

Re: Not Sure Championship Relevance?

Postby Paul Cooksey » Thu Mar 01, 2012 12:03 am

I can't comment on Michaels complain, being unaware of the details. I assume Alex was attempting humour, but it seems to have backfired, as in-jokes tend to. I believe the etiquette in such situations is to apologise for any offence caused, while stressing no offence was intended.

I am not comfortable with Michael's criticism of David Sedgwick. I'd have no issue with him criticising David's actions as strongly as he feels the facts warrant. But the term used feels like personal abuse.

Substantively, I do not quite get why the ECF CEO, or an ECF ethics committee, would be the right escalation. Certainly complaining to Adam or Alex makes sense, since they had official roles within the LCC. But I do not think they were acting as ECF officers at the LCC.

As we have said here many times, the ECF is at this time a Federation, quite unlike, for example, the FFE. The ECF accepts events for grading, FIDE rating, and even council voting rights, without insisting that they are run by officials with ECF qualifications. So it is unclear to me that the ECF has the authority to deal with complaints about individuals, and what meaningful sanctions it has against individuals

Unless an event is run by the ECF, and few are, it seems more appropriate to complain to the event organiser. Malcolm Pein is at the top of the LCC structure. Complaining to the ECF only seems relevant when something has happened so serious that the event itself should be censured by the ECF, by excluding it from grading, rating, council, etc. I do not think wrong doing on that scale is being suggested in this case.

Alex Holowczak
Posts: 7886
Joined: Sat May 30, 2009 5:18 pm
Location: Oldbury, Worcestershire
Contact:

Re: Not Sure Championship Relevance?

Postby Alex Holowczak » Thu Mar 01, 2012 12:07 am

Paul Cooksey wrote:I can't comment on Michaels complain, being unaware of the details. I assume Alex was attempting humour, but it seems to have backfired, as in-jokes tend to. I believe the etiquette in such situations is to apologise for any offence caused, while stressing no offence was intended.


I'm not entirely sure which in-joke I'm being accused of making. My LCC sign referred to the location of the scoresheet box. The sign that said "Some Rounds Start Late - Get Over It" was absolutely nothing to do with me.

David Sedgwick
Posts: 2778
Joined: Mon Apr 09, 2007 5:56 pm
Location: Croydon

Re: Not Sure Championship Relevance?

Postby David Sedgwick » Thu Mar 01, 2012 12:19 am

Paul Cooksey wrote:I am not comfortable with Michael's criticism of David Sedgwick. I'd have no issue with him criticising David's actions as strongly as he feels the facts warrant. But the term used feels like personal abuse.

Thank you for joining those who have condemned the way Michael has chosen to respond to my post.

I don't think that any actions of mine are at issue here. Michael has criticised my opinions, which he is indeed fully entitled to do.

Roger de Coverly
Posts: 15799
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 2:51 pm

Re: Not Sure Championship Relevance?

Postby Roger de Coverly » Thu Mar 01, 2012 12:29 am

Michael J R White wrote:Not sure you what your point is?


The phrase being used is a parody of the slogan on the tee-shirt which CJ proposed to wear at the prize-giving of the 2011 British. He was asked to re-consider and over-reacted, creating a media storm and conflict within the ECF which continues to this day.

So it would be possible to object to the parody on the grounds of it being an insult to CJ, the cause that his shirt promoted, or the managers and arbiters at Sheffield.

Apart from that, it represents an attempt at student or post student humour, which as pointed out by Phil M is past its sell-by date.

I suppose it's an in-joke, but if you post oblique comments in a forum, you need to know these things. Why the ECF CEO didn't dismiss the complaint along these lines is a mystery. Anyone reading the report on the earlier Imperial College Congress would have been aware of the meme.

Michael J R White wrote:In Malcolm Pein's case, it wasn't about getting a poor reply, it was about getting no reply.


I imagine he gave it the attention he felt it deserved.
Last edited by Roger de Coverly on Thu Mar 01, 2012 12:32 am, edited 1 time in total.

Andy McCulloch
Posts: 78
Joined: Wed Nov 05, 2008 8:57 pm

Re: Not Sure Championship Relevance?

Postby Andy McCulloch » Thu Mar 01, 2012 12:30 am

Might I suggest that these responses indicate the trivial nature of your complaints.

A question for you.

What exactly have arbiters as a group done to you to provoke such single minded abuse from you?
Last edited by Andy McCulloch on Thu Mar 01, 2012 12:39 am, edited 1 time in total.

John Upham
Posts: 4026
Joined: Wed Apr 04, 2007 10:29 am
Location: Cove, Hampshire, England.
Contact:

Re: Not Sure Championship Relevance?

Postby John Upham » Thu Mar 01, 2012 12:34 am

Michael,

What actions would bring closure to this episode for you?

We can at least share your plan.

Andy McCulloch
Posts: 78
Joined: Wed Nov 05, 2008 8:57 pm

Re: Not Sure Championship Relevance?

Postby Andy McCulloch » Thu Mar 01, 2012 12:45 am

Not a troll, have edited the comment, just astounded by your continual attacks on arbiters. Many of the points raised are indeed trivial.
Thought about it and decided not to descend to your level.

Roger de Coverly
Posts: 15799
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 2:51 pm

Re: Not Sure Championship Relevance?

Postby Roger de Coverly » Thu Mar 01, 2012 12:48 am

Unless the issue is of an insult to CJ, his cause or the organisers and arbiters at Sheffield, it is essentially trivial. The appropriate response would have been to bring it up on a platform which specialises in trivia and gossip, namely this one. Those like myself and Brendan, also competing at Olympia, could have responded that it was a dubious attempt at humour by a younger generation. As it was, the 2011 Classic FIDE open and other side events seemed to have been completed without ongoing issues, unlike the 2011 British.

Roger de Coverly
Posts: 15799
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 2:51 pm

Re: Not Sure Championship Relevance?

Postby Roger de Coverly » Thu Mar 01, 2012 1:05 am

Michael J R White wrote:There's more to this tedious affair, but a big issue was around people, like Pein (or his PA) and Raoof saying they would get back to me and then not.


It isn't really a surprise that you get a non-response to the raising of trivial issues. More of a problem is the lack of comment on issues of a more serious nature. For example, as mentioned earlier, what's the status of the ECF's legal action against FIDE in the CAS? Are the ECF even going to admit the existence of the legal action on their website?

Michael J R White wrote:Roger, do you understand the concept of the 4th Dimension?


No, would you care to explain, preferably in simple terms?

Roger de Coverly
Posts: 15799
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 2:51 pm

Re: Not Sure Championship Relevance?

Postby Roger de Coverly » Thu Mar 01, 2012 1:17 am

Michael J R White wrote:The notice you had at the Classic, above the box, said something very akin to, "Scoresheets in box, Not to Me!" and used an exclamation mark.

Have none of the senior arbiters / organisers mentioned any of these issues being raised to you before on the LCC?


Arbiters and organisers aren't unknown for dubious attempts at humour. The late Steve Boniface of the West of England had a pole which he threatened to use to close down any mobile phone which rang in his vicinity.

Chess tournaments can be deadly serious affairs. Attempts to lighten the mood don't have to be outlawed or treated as undesirable.

Roger de Coverly
Posts: 15799
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 2:51 pm

Re: Not Sure Championship Relevance?

Postby Roger de Coverly » Thu Mar 01, 2012 1:26 am

Michael J R White wrote:Ok, there is a time differential between me posting comments on here and originally identifying the underlying issue.
My knowledge of events, when I have identified the initial issue may be limited.


If you comment on existing issues, you might have been expected to have read some of the previous opinions expressed and facts revealed. A posting to the effect of "Why does the London Classic have a sign saying 'some rounds start late, get over it'?" would have got a factual reply which might have given some of the background. It's a valid point that those not in the know might feel insulted. The justification for attacking the organiser of a separate event, even if the organiser was present at the London Classic, is obscure.

Andy McCulloch
Posts: 78
Joined: Wed Nov 05, 2008 8:57 pm

Re: Not Sure Championship Relevance?

Postby Andy McCulloch » Thu Mar 01, 2012 1:48 am

Michael J R White wrote:
Andy McCulloch wrote:Not a troll, have edited the comment, just astounded by your continual attacks on arbiters. Many of the points raised are indeed trivial.
Thought about it and decided not to descend to your level.


Why did you edit the comment to remove "simple", yet reintroduce that suggestion in your third sentence?
You massive troll.


My third sentence does no such thing. It merely states that I realised, prior to your response, that I had made the mistake of being personally abusive.

My only excuse for such stupidity is an excessive intake of ethanol, what's yours?

User avatar
Carl Hibbard
Posts: 5437
Joined: Fri Dec 08, 2006 8:05 pm
Location: Evesham

Re: Not Sure Championship Relevance?

Postby Carl Hibbard » Thu Mar 01, 2012 7:24 am

Some of the recent posts are getting a little childish so can we keep to the point please people and stop this rather silly name calling?
Cheers
Carl Hibbard


Return to “Congress Diary”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests