CJ Banned?

[Neil Graham]

On the assumption that this was in some part a serious question, it's in North Tyneside. I am reliably informed that the venue is air-conditioned.

I thought it passed to a different region each year (ECCU Yarmouth to WCCU Torquay to SCCU Canterbury to NCCU Sheffield so MCCU would be technically be next i think is the order). I am not fussed either way and am confident that the venue is very good - air conditioning is necessary in the summer.

There is no set rota of venues, it's up to the ECF to decide on the venue on recommendation from the appropriate officer/director.

[AustinElliott]

What Andrew Stone said.

[Adam Raoof]

Re: Lara Barnes, I can personally say nothing even ambivalent against her. Top class arbiter, top class person.

FWIW I disagree CJ; you're being all cutely apologetic again, but surely you can't apologise for how you feel: that's just innate, and if you're having to apologise for that, something is a bit wrong. If anything, as President, your natural reaction is even more valid. I certainly wouldn't want a President who had as little say in events as Jim Hackett did in Yes Prime Minister.

So let's put this silly thread to bed and agree that CJ is an excellent President, all the arbiters at the event were fantastic, and that North Shields 2012 will rawk our collective sawks Or should I be quiet?

313 posts and counting and this is the most sensible. Dan - let me be the first to buy you a drink at North Shields in 2012.

[David Shepherd]

I find it difficult to accept the decision that CJ was not allowed to present the prizes was correct (particulary given all he has done for staging the championships). He wore a t-shirt that he felt acceptable.

However the issue was whether all those receiving the prizes and those present would find it ok, probably the answer was yes. However from what I read Lara felt that that there was a chance someone may find it offensive or consider it inappropriate. I don't think the specifics of what were on the t-shirt are that significant.

Whether rightly or wrongly a decision was taken (slightly disappointing for some of the prize winners and CJ, but thats all). Everyone got there prizes and no one was banned. CJ was present and invited to speak. He also did a great job when the display board went wrong.

In my opinion no one should resign, there is no issue, all concerned acted as they thought best, no one need appologise for anything, there should be no issue.

[PaulTalbot]

Paul McKeown: I have already told you that I will happily discuss this in private with you but I think a chess forum should be about chess not theology. Having said that I think you have a poor knowledge of theology, hermeneutics, or the Israelite culture.

David was not bisexual. I'm sure you'd like him to have been bisexual. I'm sure you'd like the whole world to be bisexual, but some of us aren't, GET OVER IT!

[Paul Cooksey]

In my opinion no one should resign, there is no issue, all concerned acted as they thought best, no one need appologise for anything, there should be no issue.

Really? No damage to British chess as a result of this incident?

We have a kind of Godwin's law on this forum. The longer a thread gets, the more likely it is someone will suggest we pretend it never happened.

I feel the ECF Directors should take this incident seriously. Either a poor decision was made, or no decision was made due to lack of accountability. Lessons ought to be learnt.

[Paul McKeown]

Paul McKeown: David was not bisexual. I'm sure you'd like him to have been bisexual. I'm sure you'd like the whole world to be bisexual, but some of us aren't, GET OVER IT!

Actually, I couldn't care who is and who isn't. It's their business, not mine. In fact if people find love or lust with each other, then I am happy for them. It certainly isn't yours to condemn people for their biology, even if you have made a rather perverse reading of an ancient text. I have absolutely no interest in discussing your obsession in private: it is entirely baseless and if you cannot justify yourself then I let your problem lie with you. A heart of stone is certainly not part of the new covenant expounded in the Acts, no matter how it might suit your prejudices. As for your jibe about bla knowledge of bla, bla, hermeneutics, bla, no doubt you are right, but at least I can read a text for what it actually says, not for what I would like it to say.

[Michael Jones]

I don't wish to comment on the rights and wrongs of the matter, but I will say that I think it's been blown out of proportion somewhat. Although I don't have direct experience of either, I'm told by those who do that CJ does an excellent job at the ECF and the arbiters have done an excellent job of overseeing the tournament, so it would be a loss to chess if either felt compelled to resign as a result of this. Take a deep breath, stand back, have a cup of tea and a biscuit if that's your thing. Perhaps one party may decide an apology is in order; perhaps someone will feel the need to introduce a dress code for presentation ceremonies to prevent any further disputes as to what is or is not suitable - but please, no resignations.

PS to the two Pauls - please take your debate somewhere else. Not being a theologian, I have no idea which of you is right, but I do think that this forum is not an appropriate place for it.

[matt_ward]

David you speak great logic and think great logic just not all people do!

[David Shepherd]

There is a saying - no such thing as bad publicity - damage to chess - to be honest no I don't think so. Maybe now people will realise there was a championship taking place including the top players.

[matt_ward]

We all make mistakes it's that simple we are all human. It would not be natural not to make errors or mis- judgements and perhaps they both made errors; neither are too blame more than one another.

I am sure it will calm down in a few days.

[AustinElliott]

And, er, what David Shepherd said.

And, er, what Michael Jones said. On all counts...

Really? No damage to British chess as a result of this incident?

Well, no-one's said that, though see David's second comment. But good people resigning is hardly likely to mitigate the damage, assuming there was any.

Asking that people have a think about what can be learnt from this, and take steps to avoid similar PR implosions in future, is certainly a sensible course of action. I don't think one should equate people saying 'no-one needs to quit' to imply that they are saying 'nothing happened'.

[Paul McKeown]

PS to the two Pauls - please take your debate somewhere else. Not being a theologian, I have no idea which of you is right, but I do think that this forum is not an appropriate place for it.

Fair enough. The statement was made that homosexuality is condemned by the Bible. I wished to point out that that has been contested strongly by many people, but Mr. Talbot chose to challenge that this had any basis. Frankly what he thinks is of little interest to me, but the point is now made clearly enough that there are different religious perspectives on that topic. His are no longer held by society at large, and many religious groups in this country would disagree with them too.

As for CJ, he certainly should not resign, nor should the ECF accept his resignation. That would be absurd, the whole episode has the potential to damage the interest of chess in this country, I don't believe it should be allowed to. No resignations, but clear and prompt communication to the broader public is needed.

[Paul Cooksey]

Asking that people have a think about what can be learnt from this, and take steps to avoid similar PR implosions in future, is certainly a sensible course of action. I don't think one should equate people saying 'no-one needs to quit' to imply that they are saying 'nothing happened'.

I concur with this view. I interpreted talk of "no issue" as implying the matter should be forgotten, wrongly it seems.

Lara's comments on Facebook reassured me as to the good faith of her actions, and CJs posts as to his. But they are not the only people involved. Until facts are established, I think it is wrong to make assumptions about accountability and necessary actions. But this and the SCA thread have made me question the management of the event.

[Phil Makepeace]

We like satire. Get over it.