An Open Letter to CJ De Mooi

Discuss anything you like about chess related matters in this forum.
Roger de Coverly
Posts: 19265
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 2:51 pm

Re: An Open Letter to CJ De Mooi

Post by Roger de Coverly » Mon Nov 28, 2011 5:27 pm

Ernie Lazenby wrote: BTW I dont recall any of the board saying on this forum that Alex's complaint had been unanimously rejected? Maybe there was a majority or they agreed a collective position but thats a little different from unanimous.
It's possible to nit-pick and say that it can't have been unanimous because they weren't all there. The new Junior Director was on his way to Brazil and the Home Director was absent for part of the meeting, particularly the part where they were considering the appointees to various Home posts.

Perhaps they did agree to reject the complaint with near unanimity. It's embarrassing for them to be confronted with opposition to the decision, particularly from the North East, when the rejection became public. On Sunday, for example, AF was claiming that the decision on Alex's re-appointment for 2012 had been deferred.

Mick Norris
Posts: 8433
Joined: Tue Apr 17, 2007 10:12 am
Location: Bolton, Greater Manchester

Re: An Open Letter to CJ De Mooi

Post by Mick Norris » Mon Nov 28, 2011 5:41 pm

Ernie Lazenby wrote:SNIP and, yes I repeat, this thread has not resulted in personal attacks or abuse.
Ernie

You don't accept PMs so this has to be public

In case you didn't understand my earlier post, I have been subjected to this
Any postings on here represent my personal views and should not be taken as representative of the Manchester Chess Federation www.manchesterchess.co.uk

PeterTurland
Posts: 541
Joined: Sat Dec 01, 2007 10:03 pm
Location: Leicester
Contact:

Re: An Open Letter to CJ De Mooi

Post by PeterTurland » Mon Nov 28, 2011 5:49 pm

Andrew Farthing wrote:
PeterTurland wrote:I hesitate before writing this, hence do not write it.
Wise words - you're probably right.
Sorry Andrew, my ire has got the better of me.

When human beings talk to each other, they forget one vast divide, that being the difference between concept and context.

You can look at life in two ways, you can look at it in terms of yourself, or you can look at yourself in terms of life, or to paraphrase JFK, it is not what life can do for you, but what you can do for life.

In this respect I believe chess can make a difference, especially when it is taught to the very young.

The worse thing about this whole affair, is it demonstrates how black and white morality has become. The whole debate has a distinct air of 'stand up, sit down, this is toy town' This is right and that is wrong, yeah oh, were it that simple!! I very much aspire to the idea of prioritisation.

Mick Norris
Posts: 8433
Joined: Tue Apr 17, 2007 10:12 am
Location: Bolton, Greater Manchester

Re: An Open Letter to CJ De Mooi

Post by Mick Norris » Mon Nov 28, 2011 5:51 pm

Ernie Lazenby wrote:Steve. This forum has a number of very active threads over the years, not least the Chess for schools issue. Had it not been for this forum the wider chess playing public would never have found out what a debacle that was. There was a lot of very heated posts but for the most part no one took them personally. In the main the reason why some people who dont post on here is because they are the ones who keep a low profile anyway not because some threads get a little hot.

This forum is the one place we actually get to know what is going on because under the current council system the wider chess playing community gets to know what the reps want them to know thats assuming they are even asked.

Also has been said many times, the reps attend Council but how does anyone know for sure that the views of the man on the clapham omnibus are accurately reported . This forum gives that man the opportunity to make his views known.
The chess player on any form of public of private transport does not make his views known to his reps, because he is too lazy to do so or he simply wants to play chess, but he is prepared to type the same thing repeatedly no matter how upsetting it may be for the good reps to read

This Forum is not the place where you get the full facts, what you get is the full range of opinions, the facts have been the first casualty of the war which you continue to wage, not caring about who gets hurt in the process

Your rep didn't attend, get over it
Any postings on here represent my personal views and should not be taken as representative of the Manchester Chess Federation www.manchesterchess.co.uk

John Hodgson
Posts: 62
Joined: Thu Jul 29, 2010 10:13 am

Re: An Open Letter to CJ De Mooi

Post by John Hodgson » Mon Nov 28, 2011 6:09 pm

Nigel Short wrote:The Press Complaints Commision has dismissed the complaint of Alex McFarlane. The Board of the ECF has unanimously dismissed his complaint. Is it not time for the gentleman to now acknowledge the utter futility of continuing to wage his obsessive campaign?
Others have commented on the second sentence in the above.

Taking the first sentence, this is obviously true, but what does it tell us?

The case was McFarlane v The Sunday Times, not McFarlane v de Mooi.

The PCC ruled that The Sunday Times had accurately reported Mr de Mooi's allegations. The key sentence is: "Although it was accepted by both parties that Mr de Mooi had not used the term “homophobia” in his interview with the newspaper, the Commission considered that the term was a reasonable description of the allegations that had been made."

So the PCC judgement reinforces the case that Mr de Mooi had made a serious accusation and, on this particular point, supports Alex and Lara's position rather than undermines it (if one believes the accusation to be untrue, of course).

It also said that any remarks made by a journalist (Keene) was outside its remit. It may be outside the remit of the PCC, but it does not follow from this that it has to be outside the remit of the ECF.

John Hodgson
Posts: 62
Joined: Thu Jul 29, 2010 10:13 am

Re: An Open Letter to CJ De Mooi

Post by John Hodgson » Mon Nov 28, 2011 6:15 pm

John Hodgson wrote:
It also said that any remarks made by a journalist (Keene) was outside its remit. It may be outside the remit of the PCC, but it does not follow from this that it has to be outside the remit of the ECF.[/quote wrote:
I intended to say 'by a journalist (Keene) on Twitter was outside its remit.'

User avatar
IM Jack Rudd
Posts: 4142
Joined: Tue Apr 17, 2007 1:13 am
Location: Bideford

Re: An Open Letter to CJ De Mooi

Post by IM Jack Rudd » Mon Nov 28, 2011 6:19 pm

John Hodgson wrote: It also said that any remarks made by a journalist (Keene) was outside its remit. It may be outside the remit of the PCC, but it does not follow from this that it has to be outside the remit of the ECF.
Keene's activities may or may not be within the remit of the ECF, but I shouldn't think he cares much: he neither plays in any ECF events nor holds any official ECF post, and nor is he likely to in the near future. Therefore there is little the ECF can do in the way of meaningful sanctions, even if it decides his activities are within its remit.

John Wright
Posts: 69
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 4:57 pm

Re: An Open Letter to CJ De Mooi

Post by John Wright » Mon Nov 28, 2011 6:23 pm

Mick Norris wrote:
Your rep didn't attend, get over it
That's quite a casually dismissive and confrontational thing to say.
Fortunately this is just a forum and not a prize giving event, where such a tone might be challenged.

Jonathan Rogers
Posts: 4146
Joined: Tue Nov 18, 2008 9:26 pm

Re: An Open Letter to CJ De Mooi

Post by Jonathan Rogers » Mon Nov 28, 2011 6:26 pm

Nigel Short wrote:There are a couple of earlier remarks by Jonathan Rogers should not be permitted to pass by without comment:

1) The Press Complaints Commission did NOT anywhere state that CJ de Mooi had defamed Alex McFarlane.
To claim such a thing is a malicious falsehood.

2) The ECF Board unanimously rejected Alex McFarlane's complaint - in a skype conference on the 16th November.
For you to strongly imply that I deliberately lied to the English Chess Forum is grossly insulting.

Nigel Short.
These points have largely been dealt with already. I referred to "any" defamation, in the sense that "the PCC may have decided that keene acted responsibly, but at the same time made it clear that if there was any blame/defamation, it was on the part of CJ who was keene's sole source" .

I don't prejudge whether CJ is liable in defamation to Alex. Let's wait and see, in the same way that the ECF Board wanted us to "wait and see" for the PCC decision.

16th November - well, pray give us more details. I will apologise if what you said is an accurate summary of the discussion. Exactly which complaint of Alex was unanimously rejected, for a start?

Jonathan Rogers
Posts: 4146
Joined: Tue Nov 18, 2008 9:26 pm

Re: An Open Letter to CJ De Mooi

Post by Jonathan Rogers » Mon Nov 28, 2011 6:28 pm

John Wright wrote:
Mick Norris wrote:
Your rep didn't attend, get over it
That's quite a casually dismissive and confrontational thing to say.
Fortunately this is just a forum and not a prize giving event, where such a tone might be challenged.
My chosen rep wasn't there, albeit that the relevant votes were cast as proxies. But if he had been willing to support my views then his non-attendance would have been a drawback. 15th October clashed with a number of other chess events, not to mention half-term.

Krishna Shiatis
Posts: 667
Joined: Thu Apr 22, 2010 1:08 pm

Re: An Open Letter to CJ De Mooi

Post by Krishna Shiatis » Mon Nov 28, 2011 6:34 pm

Jonathan Rogers wrote: To Krishna and Ernie - I agree but sadly there is no one who enjoys the respect of both parties. You would think that there might be a bridge in the ECF Board, who works with CJ and who has known Alex for a lot longer, but that doesn't seem to be the case. In this respect it is a shame that many of our Board are rather young and that the elder members have not proven up to the task....
If there is no one who can mediate and no possible bridge, how about this?

If CJ and Alex agree, we can meet one morning during the London Chess Classic and talk. If they are free and willing, I will do my best to mediate. I will be there with Kiran anyway. I think that I am neutral (!) I would like to see a resolution, as would many.

CJ and Alex, if you might be willing to talk face to face, I am sure that much could be resolved. Maybe not everything, but perhaps a truce might be reached. Anyhow, it would be a start.

What say you?

PS I am a little bit mad (in the batty sense), so if you can think of someone better to mediate, please feel free to suggest!

User avatar
Adam Raoof
Posts: 2597
Joined: Sat Oct 04, 2008 4:16 pm
Location: NW4 4UY
Contact:

Re: An Open Letter to CJ De Mooi

Post by Adam Raoof » Mon Nov 28, 2011 6:44 pm

I missed Jonathan's earlier post about a 'bridge' and wondered if he meant anyone specific? I am not sure whether I am one of the younger members of the Board ;-)

I think all parties have made mistakes.
Adam Raoof IA, IO
The Chess Circuit - https://chesscircuit.substack.com/
Tornelo - https://tornelo.com/chess/orgs/chess-england
Simon Williams "The Ginger GM" - https://gingergm.com/ref/106.html
Don’t stop playing chess!

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

Re: An Open Letter to CJ De Mooi

Post by Roger de Coverly » Mon Nov 28, 2011 7:11 pm

Warren Kingston wrote: On a serious note, how many people does this discussion involve? It is such a small amount of people, chess people. I am going to the club tonight and I doubt if any other member would know wants going on, heard about the argument or even heard of Alex McFarlane, nevermind having an opinion of the events.
Regular Congress players at major events will know both Alex and Lara, as will most of the UK's arbiters. So within the world of those who play at British Championships and similar events on a regular basis, they are major figures. At a world level, Alex was an arbiter at the recent Candidates' matches.

User avatar
Adam Raoof
Posts: 2597
Joined: Sat Oct 04, 2008 4:16 pm
Location: NW4 4UY
Contact:

Re: An Open Letter to CJ De Mooi

Post by Adam Raoof » Mon Nov 28, 2011 7:12 pm

Warren Kingston wrote:
Adam Raoof wrote:I missed Jonathan's earlier post about a 'bridge' and wondered if he meant anyone specific? I am not sure whether I am one of the younger members of the Board ;-)

I think all parties have made mistakes.
I know you are really busy Adam, but did you get my PM that I sent you a few days ago?

No!
Adam Raoof IA, IO
The Chess Circuit - https://chesscircuit.substack.com/
Tornelo - https://tornelo.com/chess/orgs/chess-england
Simon Williams "The Ginger GM" - https://gingergm.com/ref/106.html
Don’t stop playing chess!

Alex McFarlane
Posts: 1556
Joined: Sat Aug 02, 2008 8:52 pm

Re: An Open Letter to CJ De Mooi

Post by Alex McFarlane » Mon Nov 28, 2011 7:16 pm

I go out for the day to view potential chess venues and I come back to about 5 pages of postings to read.

I can’t answer all the points and I’m thinking of going to my chess club but I do have to say something.

Firstly GM Short, as a member of the ECF I am entitled to take the action I have. If you don’t think I should have this right then no doubt you will put a motion forward to that effect. Until then some members are Scottish, Get over it!

You state that the Board was unanimous in rejecting my complaint. Do you really want me to tell people what that complaint was and how inaccurate the report it produced was. I will if you insist but I have told the Board I wouldn’t take it further in a move to progress things.

On the Sunday of the British Rapidplay I had the idea that Lara should stand as Manager of the British. I discussed the idea with a few people. It seemed to be a way forward. I think this shows that I want to move on.

Lara agreed and mentioned it to the Home Director. I think this shows she wants to move on.

Neither of us has commented on subsequent emails from Adam Raoof. Believe me this shows we want to see a settlement.

Lara has accepted the post of Manager, I’ve accepted her suggestion to be Chief Arbiter. I think this shows we want to take things forward.

I have asked another Director to discuss the situation with me at the Classic. Hopefully that shows good will on my part.

However, closure requires details. You cannot easily move on following the unexpected death of a loved one without some sort explanation of why it happened. Similarly, we cannot move on without knowing the truth.

As I see it there are two possible scenarios (possibly more) of what happened after the prizegiving.
1. Mr De Mooi went to the papers and stated he had been banned from the prizegiving because his t-shirt had a political slogan. The papers asked what the slogan was and concocted their own story.
2. Mr De Mooi went to the papers and stated that he had been abused and suffered at the hands of bigots who objected to the message he was trying to convey. Mr De Mooi made the allegations even if he didn't use the actual 'h' word.

We cannot get closure until we know why the papers reacted the way they did.

If scenario 1 is close to actual events I do not understand why Mr De Mooi does not state this and end the matter. If scenario 2 is closer to the mark then Mr De Mooi should apologise.

If it is 2 and Mr De Mooi doesn’t apologise is he really the type of person who should be the figurehead of the ECF?

If Mr De Mooi is willing to tell us what happens then I won't ask for an EGM.

Post Reply