Hinckley Visit

Venues, fixtures, teams and related matters.
User avatar
Carl Hibbard
Posts: 5864
Joined: Fri Dec 08, 2006 8:05 pm
Location: Evesham

Re: Hinckley Visit

Post by Carl Hibbard » Tue May 05, 2015 9:18 pm

Nothing sinister to report just a few suggestions as to a way forward some bloody silly but proposals none the less.
Cheers
Carl Hibbard

John McKenna
Posts: 4395
Joined: Tue May 17, 2011 2:02 pm

Re: Hinckley Visit

Post by John McKenna » Tue May 05, 2015 10:52 pm

Carl Hibbard wrote:Nothing sinister to report just a few suggestions as to a way forward some bloody silly but proposals none the less.
Is that what's called a non-denial denial?
Ian Thompson wrote:
John McKenna wrote:Of course, the 4NCL will not loom large there very often since I don't think it is regarded by the ECF as a brother organisation, to be celebrated, but a bastard one to be tolerated, but that's just in my view of it.
If you're right, then the 4NCL has improved its status with the EC over the years. In its early years, the BCF tried to set up a rival to it, to usurp it. The rival league never got off the ground. Does that remind you of any current activities by the ECF?
Very good point, Ian, and a timely reminder that the ECF did indeed try to maintain their stranglehold on national team events and sabotage the early 4NCL competition. They were forced to retreat in the face of its sheer popularity and size, of course.

For years the ECF never had any kind of forum. Some of its executives and officials made regular and extensive use of this august one. So, what was it that led them to decide to, belatedly, create their own, and who were the main movers and shakers behind it? (I fear that will probably remain an unanswered question.)

Edit - I see that, below, Roger has provided an answer to my question - thanks for that.
Last edited by John McKenna on Tue May 05, 2015 11:44 pm, edited 1 time in total.
To find a for(u)m that accommodates the mess, that is the task of the artist now. (Samuel Beckett)

Roger de Coverly
Posts: 19265
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 2:51 pm

Re: Hinckley Visit

Post by Roger de Coverly » Tue May 05, 2015 11:18 pm

John McKenna wrote: For years the ECF never had any kind of forum. Some of its executives and officials made regular and extensive use of this august one. So, what was it that led them to decide to, belatedly, create their own, and who were the main movers and shakers behind it? (I fear that will probably remain an unanswered question.)
The early years of the forum saw it as a semi-official forum, indeed the moderators were Carl and the then ECF CEO. It was proposed at an ECF AGM that the ECF should cut its links with the forum. The assertion being that the Forum had jeopardised sponsorship, principally with the Chess in Schools project. It's covered by the SCCU meeting reports for 2008.
http://www.sccu.ndo.co.uk/0809/bcf.htm
SCCU report on 2008 meeting wrote:English Chess Forum. This is the "outrageous" item. It was not actually on the printed agenda; it came up under President's Report. It was reported that Holloid had been less than amused by certain postings on the Forum. Also (and it's a thing you can never seek evidence for) that the Forum had cost us potential sponsors. It was said, moreover, that defamation could be an issue. We know now, but did not then, that the Board at its morning meeting had considered severing all connections with the Forum there and then; but had decided, since Council was expected along any time, to put it to Council instead. It was proposed that the Forum link on the ECF (no, Federation) front page be removed, and the Forum be asked to stop using the bcfservices domain name. This proposal was carried by a large majority. (Only two voted against, and if you've been to the Forum any time in the last three days you will know who they were.)
It would be my belief that the new Commercial Director regarded establishing a discussion forum as important. That is at least a change of view from those elected as Directors or voting members on the ECF Council who would prefer forums to be uninvented and had little or no desire to debate their decisions with all and sundry.

Andrew Zigmond
Posts: 1831
Joined: Tue Nov 22, 2011 9:23 pm
Location: Harrogate

Re: Hinckley Visit

Post by Andrew Zigmond » Wed May 06, 2015 12:11 am

Ian Thompson wrote: If you're right, then the 4NCL has improved its status with the ECF over the years. In its early years, the BCF tried to set up a rival to it, to usurp it. The rival league never got off the ground. Does that remind you of any current activities by the ECF?
I think that's a tad unfair due to the numerous personnel changes the ECF or BCF as was have had in the time since.

While I've added my voices to those criticising the war of the forums I've never felt the ECF were unreasonable in setting up their own forum for the purpose of consulting their members while maintaining a measure of control over the discussion. For those spouting wild conspiracy theories about censorship on the other place a) there's little actual evidence of that and b) if the ECF were to start censoring discussions it's pretty obvious where the debate would move to.
Controller - Yorkshire League
Chairman - Harrogate Chess Club
All views expressed entirely my own

Roger de Coverly
Posts: 19265
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 2:51 pm

Re: Hinckley Visit

Post by Roger de Coverly » Wed May 06, 2015 12:21 am

Andrew Zigmond wrote: I've never felt the ECF were unreasonable in setting up their own forum for the purpose of consulting their members while maintaining a measure of control over the discussion.
That's completely reasonable. What isn't reasonable is the implied or even stated objective to bury unofficial forums.

Please also bear in mind, that interest in English chess isn't confined to the subset of ECF members.

User avatar
Carl Hibbard
Posts: 5864
Joined: Fri Dec 08, 2006 8:05 pm
Location: Evesham

Re: Hinckley Visit

Post by Carl Hibbard » Wed May 06, 2015 7:18 am

The best way to support us since we will always remain strictly independent is just to continue to post here :!:

Additional links back to here if you advertise your site, congress or services is of course very welcome.
Cheers
Carl Hibbard

Kevin Thurlow
Posts: 4201
Joined: Wed Apr 30, 2008 12:28 pm

Re: Hinckley Visit

Post by Kevin Thurlow » Wed May 06, 2015 8:19 am

"For those spouting wild conspiracy theories about censorship on the other place a) there's little actual evidence of that and b) if the ECF were to start censoring discussions it's pretty obvious where the debate would move to."

However, individuals made statements which I regarded as falsehoods, and they then refused to withdraw them or attempt to justify them. Ignoring complaints is a form of censorship.

Ignoring complaints is the default position in chess!

Alex McFarlane
Posts: 1555
Joined: Sat Aug 02, 2008 8:52 pm

Re: Hinckley Visit

Post by Alex McFarlane » Wed May 06, 2015 8:44 am

Andrew Zigmond wrote:b) if the ECF were to start censoring discussions it's pretty obvious where the debate would move to.
The moderators in the other place seem to be quite liberal currently. It was the actions of one Director which has caused the trouble. His philosophy seems to be "Do as I say, not as I do!"
This has left the ECF Forum open to accusations of hypocrisy.

Andrew in his quote above is quite correct. As long as this forum exists the ECF cannot stifle debate as it would simply move here. Unfortunately that can be seen as a very strong reason for the ECF wanting rid of this forum. If it had a monopoly then it could insist on a much stronger 'moderation' than currently happens.

User avatar
Carl Hibbard
Posts: 5864
Joined: Fri Dec 08, 2006 8:05 pm
Location: Evesham

Re: Hinckley Visit

Post by Carl Hibbard » Wed May 06, 2015 9:44 am

Kevin Thurlow wrote:"For those spouting wild conspiracy theories about censorship on the other place a) there's little actual evidence of that and b) if the ECF were to start censoring discussions it's pretty obvious where the debate would move to."

However, individuals made statements which I regarded as falsehoods, and they then refused to withdraw them or attempt to justify them. Ignoring complaints is a form of censorship.

Ignoring complaints is the default position in chess!
Their own code of conduct which is now official may limit this in the future.
Cheers
Carl Hibbard

David Sedgwick
Posts: 4157
Joined: Mon Apr 09, 2007 5:56 pm
Location: Croydon

Re: Hinckley Visit

Post by David Sedgwick » Wed May 06, 2015 11:03 am

Andrew Zigmond wrote:... if the ECF were to start censoring discussions it's pretty obvious where the debate would move to.
Alex McFarlane wrote:Andrew in his quote above is quite correct. As long as this forum exists the ECF cannot stifle debate as it would simply move here.
That's only true so long as people are free to post here. There have been repeated suggestions that ECF Directors and Officers should not be and at least one Director clearly feels inhibited at present.

It's all very well to say that people can resign if they find their freedom of expression is restricted, but it's not actually that easy. Some of us would like to continue to serve (elements of) the ECF membership and would find it hard simply to walk away. (Sorry for being pompous.)

That's why I have resisted, and will continue to resist, restrictions that would result in me and others being faced with that choice.

User avatar
Carl Hibbard
Posts: 5864
Joined: Fri Dec 08, 2006 8:05 pm
Location: Evesham

Re: Hinckley Visit

Post by Carl Hibbard » Wed May 06, 2015 11:21 am

David Sedgwick wrote:
Andrew Zigmond wrote:... if the ECF were to start censoring discussions it's pretty obvious where the debate would move to.
Alex McFarlane wrote:Andrew in his quote above is quite correct. As long as this forum exists the ECF cannot stifle debate as it would simply move here.
That's only true so long as people are free to post here. There have been repeated suggestions that ECF Directors and Officers should not be and at least one Director clearly feels inhibited at present.

It's all very well to say that people can resign if they find their freedom of expression is restricted, but it's not actually that easy. Some of us would like to continue to serve (elements of) the ECF membership and would find it hard simply to walk away. (Sorry for being pompous.)

That's why I have resisted, and will continue to resist, restrictions that would result in me and others being faced with that choice.
It is only a matter of time before that restriction becomes mandatory I am sorry to say.
Cheers
Carl Hibbard

User avatar
Michael Farthing
Posts: 1968
Joined: Fri Apr 04, 2014 1:28 pm
Location: Morecambe, Europe

Re: Hinckley Visit

Post by Michael Farthing » Wed May 06, 2015 2:50 pm

Carl Hibbard wrote:It is only a matter of time before that restriction becomes mandatory I am sorry to say.
I'm puzzled by this. How can it be done?
A director posting here could be asked to resign. He could refuse. What then?

He cannot be removed from office as his authority comes from Council. Only Council can dismiss him. Is the Board going to call an EGM to do that?
Would it succeed? I hardly think so.

Of course, other officials are a different matter. But were one of them is courageous enough to say "Go on - sack me" then the Board has an equally difficult decision. Getting a replacement for someone of the quality of ***************, for example, would be (a) imperative and (b) impossible.

Post Reply