English Chess Forum

Michael Farthing wrote: ↑

Sat May 09, 2020 8:03 pm

Adam Raoof wrote: ↑

Sat May 09, 2020 1:09 pm

can I join the group?

You're already a member Adam, as are all Council members. You should also have received an email telling you to log on for the first time. If not, let me know and I'll send you a copy.

Like Council meetings themselves, it is not public, but that does not mean members cannot share things they read there. As regards the secrecy issue I did hesitate about this. I decided in the end that it was more important at first to have confidence from Council members that it would not have the adverse publicity that has affected other forums. It may be that at some point it will be made visible to the public but that will certainly only happen with the ready support of the forum membership.

It was never expected that the forum would be high volume, but rather that it would be a means of discussion when particular issues come up. We shall see whether it develops into a worthwhile tool - if not it will close.

Can you check to see if I have ever logged in? The reason I say that is your email not only essentially gives every recipient the user ID but also their password! This is not very secure.

"The ECF is conducting its usual game - a blindfold simul in which it, the master, can see the position but we the multitude of ordinary members cannot be allowed more than the occasional glimpse from afar. In the current fog of war against the virus it is even more necessary to keep the position enclosed."

Not sure that analogy works - surely it's more Kriegspiel?

(in the chess variant sense of course)

Michael Farthing wrote: ↑

Sat May 09, 2020 8:03 pm

It may be that at some point it will be made visible to the public but that will certainly only happen with the ready support of the forum membership.

Seems little point visible but cannot comment?

Chris Fegan wrote: ↑

Sat May 09, 2020 12:40 pm

I don't think is particularly fair nor correct and certainly not my intention as an individual Board member.

Michael Farthing wrote: ↑

Sat May 09, 2020 8:03 pm

Like Council meetings themselves, it is not public, but that does not mean members cannot share things they read there. As regards the secrecy issue I did hesitate about this. I decided in the end that it was more important at first to have confidence from Council members that it would not have the adverse publicity that has affected other forums. It may be that at some point it will be made visible to the public but that will certainly only happen with the ready support of the forum membership.

Whilst Council meetings are not public, they seldom discuss anything confidential. The size of Council would make that problematic.

I have no problem with only Council Members and Invited Guests being allowed to post, but I would like to see the Forum become visible as soon as possible. That would make it easier for ECF members to raise relevant points with their representatives and - dare I say it? - lead to better informed discussion on this Forum.

Meanwhile, may I enquire as to the criteria for becoming an Invited Guest?

There is a case for making the Council Forum private: many people (including ECF board members) have told me over the years that they would never post here. (Of course we all value the cut and thrust of honest debate, but many non-posters regard this place as a bearpit.)

Mike Gunn wrote: ↑

Sun May 10, 2020 3:40 pm

There is a case for making the Council Forum private: many people (including ECF board members) have told me over the years that they would never post here.

If the ECF, or perhaps its Council members, are adamant about not allowing the individuals comprising the ECF membership at large a direct say in who runs the ECF or how the ECF is run, then those who make the decisions should at least have the courage to air their views in public.

Although if their published views are regarded as unacceptable, they will still get attacked, but not on the private Council forum if it's Read Only to those not Council members.

Roger
I think you should ask yourself why it is felt to be a good idea to set up an extra forum, and why people might be inclined to post there rather than here. Lots of private groups exist for very good reason. If the group's objectives were to bypass the membership then I suspect many would not get involved. if it is to have a slightly more informed dialogue than might be possible in this place and might encourage views from those who don't find this place accommodating then that seems fair enough to me. Its assisting Council members - it is not worsening the existing position of ECF members, the conduct of some of whom has made debate in this place unappealing.

The difficulty is trying to balance accountability of ECF Officials with the occasional mindless abuse you find on here.

It's unclear how that can be achieved.

I think one of the positive thoughts is that there needs to be a dialogue between the Directors and Council between Council meetings. Clearly the framework for that dialogue and the scope of it needs to be tested, but if a safe place can be found that would mean better communication with member representatives even if its not a full scale debate with the full membership.

In these difficult times it's all about working together. Perhaps now is the time for the ECF to push the government for the reinstatement of the annual £60,000 grant it received until it was stopped two days after the coalition came into power.
The government has been quick to support other sports with loans and grants eg. £16 million for rugby league recently.

"Perhaps now is the time for the ECF to push the government for the reinstatement of the annual £60,000 grant it received until it was stopped two days after the coalition came into power."

ECF could try - but I think the Government is spending money on more important things at present. They will not be giving it away easily.

The bit about coalition cutting the funding from 60K to 0 is not true, it had already been slashed. It was clear for some time before that funding was being reduced across the board (could have chosen better words, but I'll leave it). I worked for a scientific establishment which relied heavily on Government funding, and we noticed increasing difficulties in getting it even for important projects. So it was obvious that funding for a number of other activities would be reduced dramatically or cut altogether. I did warn BCF at several meetings that this would happen, Either nobody believed me or they decided to just hope for the best. To be charitable, possibly they made plans behind the scenes to get alternative funding (i.e. from the members).

"The government has been quick to support other sports with loans and grants eg. £16 million for rugby league recently."

They have withdrawn funding from a number of Olympic sports. If they have supported rugby league, then it is because more people follow it (it's on television), and quite possibly more people play it. I will not annoy Justin by putting a number on that though!

I think rugby league is fairly popular in the constituencies that the Conservatives won for the first time at the last general election. If Jon Tait and the rest of Mansfield Chess Club put forward a submission for a grant to aid Community Chess, They might have a chance

Simon Rogers wrote: ↑

Sat May 16, 2020 1:01 am

The government has been quick to support other sports with loans and grants eg. £16 million for rugby league recently.

I would guess it's willing to support sports that are run on a commercial basis with people's jobs at risk, in which case the support is probably more for the business than the sport.

I'd be surprised if it's provided any support to amateur sports which are funded by the participants.

Rugby League is strongly embedded in some communities, with a lot of community work being done by the clubs; there's little money in comparison to football, or even rugby union, and without being able to play, and thus get the TV money, most of the clubs will go bust; hence the rescue package (which I think won't be going to Catalans, Toulouse or Toronto)

Kevin Thurlow wrote: ↑

Sat May 16, 2020 9:24 am

They have withdrawn funding from a number of Olympic sports. If they have supported rugby league, then it is because more people follow it (it's on television), and quite possibly more people play it.

If so, it seems pretty damn stupid. It's sports that don't have a lot of TV and spectator revenue which require funding.