Members' Representation

Debate directly related to English Chess Federation matters.
Post Reply
User avatar
Michael Farthing
Posts: 2069
Joined: Fri Apr 04, 2014 1:28 pm
Location: Morecambe, Europe

Re: Members' Representation

Post by Michael Farthing » Fri Sep 24, 2021 12:16 pm

JustinHorton wrote:
Fri Sep 24, 2021 12:13 pm
Michael Farthing wrote:
Fri Sep 24, 2021 12:06 pm
Meanwhile, of more importance, "How many angels can you place on the head of a needle?".
Not especially, no, Michael. I think for instance it's reasonable to ask whether, in nominating Mike Truran's opponent, while right in the middle of a personal row with Mike Truran, Rob Willmoth had entirely put aside his own feelings and interests and was acting purely in the interests of the members who he did not consult.

I mean what does it look like?
That the world may judge according to its wits. It is not, however, outside the rules that we have.

User avatar
JustinHorton
Posts: 10364
Joined: Mon Aug 04, 2008 10:06 am
Location: Somewhere you're not

Re: Members' Representation

Post by JustinHorton » Fri Sep 24, 2021 12:29 pm

I don't think the difference between the letter and spirit of the law is unknown to the world and its wits, and nor do you.
"Do you play chess?"
"Yes, but I prefer a game with a better chance of cheating."

lostontime.blogspot.com

User avatar
Michael Farthing
Posts: 2069
Joined: Fri Apr 04, 2014 1:28 pm
Location: Morecambe, Europe

Re: Members' Representation

Post by Michael Farthing » Fri Sep 24, 2021 12:36 pm

JustinHorton wrote:
Fri Sep 24, 2021 12:29 pm
I don't think the difference between the letter and spirit of the law is unknown to the world and its wits, and nor do you.
Precisely, Justin! Which is why continued hammering of the point is now less interesting than the Point of the Needle!

User avatar
JustinHorton
Posts: 10364
Joined: Mon Aug 04, 2008 10:06 am
Location: Somewhere you're not

Re: Members' Representation

Post by JustinHorton » Fri Sep 24, 2021 12:39 pm

No, not especially: the representative concerned still does not appear to have got round to consulting, let alone cast his vote, and so his curious conduct strikes me as a live and relevant issue. If you're of an alternative view you may need to explain it more fully.
"Do you play chess?"
"Yes, but I prefer a game with a better chance of cheating."

lostontime.blogspot.com

User avatar
Michael Farthing
Posts: 2069
Joined: Fri Apr 04, 2014 1:28 pm
Location: Morecambe, Europe

Re: Members' Representation

Post by Michael Farthing » Fri Sep 24, 2021 12:56 pm

OK, I shall stop this attempt at proof by reiterative assertion.

John Reyes
Posts: 674
Joined: Sun Aug 30, 2009 10:51 pm
Location: Manchester

Re: Members' Representation

Post by John Reyes » Fri Sep 24, 2021 2:37 pm

After Speaking to Tim Wall, the Silver members Report will be out next week, just to let the silver members know
Any postings on here represent my personal views only and also Dyslexia as well

User avatar
Chris Goodall
Posts: 1057
Joined: Sun Oct 10, 2010 6:40 pm
Contact:

Re: Members' Representation

Post by Chris Goodall » Fri Sep 24, 2021 3:59 pm

Right, I'm gonna stand for Bronze rep next year. With the manifesto that I'm usually a Bronze member, and that unless the Bronze members I hear from are unusually united in their view, I will simply vote the opposite way to the other Bronze rep.
Donate to Sabrina's fundraiser at https://gofund.me/aeae42c7 to support victims of sexual abuse in the chess world.

Northumberland webmaster, Jesmond CC something-or-other. Views mine. Definitely below the Goodall Line.

Mick Norris
Posts: 10328
Joined: Tue Apr 17, 2007 10:12 am
Location: Bolton, Greater Manchester

Re: Members' Representation

Post by Mick Norris » Sat Sep 25, 2021 8:21 pm

Gold members have received an email from our representatives

No surprises
Any postings on here represent my personal views

Paul Cooksey
Posts: 1519
Joined: Fri Oct 21, 2016 4:15 pm

Re: Members' Representation

Post by Paul Cooksey » Sat Sep 25, 2021 8:27 pm

I suppose no surprises, but I thought a bit odd.

The email suggests that the delegates have not yet decided who to vote for in the contested elections. But they do support all the motions consistent with Malcolm's policies and they did nominate him for CEO. You would think, on that one at least, they might have said they had a recommendation.

Angus French
Posts: 2151
Joined: Thu May 15, 2008 1:37 am
Contact:

Re: Members' Representation

Post by Angus French » Sat Sep 25, 2021 8:48 pm

Might the consultation messages from the members' reps be published here?

Roger de Coverly
Posts: 21301
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 2:51 pm

Re: Members' Representation

Post by Roger de Coverly » Sat Sep 25, 2021 11:07 pm

Angus French wrote:
Sat Sep 25, 2021 8:48 pm
Might the consultation messages from the members' reps be published here?
I'll leak it.
Dear ECF Gold Members

We write to you as the gold member representatives in respect of the forthcoming E.C.F AGM on the 16th October.

There are two contested elections taking place

The election for CEO

The first is the for the position of CEO between Mike Truran and Malcolm Pein. A very difficult election. Their election speeches can be seen: -

Malcolm Pein:- https://www.englishchess.org.uk/wp-cont ... m-Pein.pdf

Mike Truran:- https://www.englishchess.org.uk/wp-cont ... Truran.pdf

The Election for the Chair of the Governance Committee

The second contested election for the position of the Chair of the Governance Committee between Chris Fegan and Robert Stern. There election speeches can be seen:-

Chris Fegan:- https://www.englishchess.org.uk/wp-cont ... -Fegan.pdf

Robert Stern:- https://www.englishchess.org.uk/wp-cont ... -Stern.pdf

Two very difficult elections. We would very much like to hear your views on these elections and who you would like to vote for. I would strongly advise looking at the election speeches as they speak for themselves when making you decision

In addition to the election there are three motions for our attention. We would appreciate you comments on how you would like to vote on these as well

1) Resolution 10
Council requests the PIF Trustees to work with the Board to simplify the ECF/BCF structure and to ensure that the PIF Funds, while remaining under their stewardship, are transferred to the ECF and not to other organisations or charitable trusts without an explicit vote authorising this by Council and the agreement of the Board.

Our View. It is vital we do not transfer ECF/BCF funds to trust and outside organisations. I see no reason why we would want to do this, and lose control of how membership funds are allocated.

Our recommendation is to vote for this motion

2) Resolution 11

Council requests the Directors of Chess Centre Ltd to work with the Board to simplify the ECF/BCF structure, to dissolve Chess Centre Ltd and transfer the assets to the ECF for the benefit of members.

Our View. It makes sense to transfer the assets to the ECF so they can fall under the stewardship of the board and be distributed accordingly

Our recommendation is to vote for this motion

3) Resolution 12

Council notes the recent statement from Oliver Dowden MP regarding chess and instructs the Board to attempt to engage with government to secure recognition of the game as well as funding, with a view of developing the game in England.

Our View. This should have been going on for the last few years and clearly has not been. We are in a period of potential chess boom due to the Queens Gambit and many people playing chess for the first time during the pandemic. We should grasp this opportunity

Our recommendation is to vote for this motion

We look forward to hearing your views.

Best Wishes Rob Willmoth and Lorin D’Costa Gold Member Representatives

NickFaulks
Posts: 8453
Joined: Sat Jan 02, 2010 1:28 pm

Re: Members' Representation

Post by NickFaulks » Sun Sep 26, 2021 10:27 am

A few quick comments
I would strongly advise looking at the election speeches as they speak for themselves when making you decision
Who is "I"? One of the two Gold reps, or someone else?

Robert's election address is simple enough, but the writer might have mentioned that Chris's is best read in conjunction with the report of the NEDs

https://www.englishchess.org.uk/wp-cont ... l-2021.pdf

where section 4.9 onwards paints a different picture.
1) Resolution 10
.....
Our View. It is vital we do not transfer ECF/BCF funds to trust and outside organisations. I see no reason why we would want to do this, and lose control of how membership funds are allocated.
What exactly does "membership funds" mean here? And there's that "I" again.
3) Resolution 12

Council notes the recent statement from Oliver Dowden MP regarding chess and instructs the Board to attempt to engage with government to secure recognition of the game as well as funding, with a view of developing the game in England.

Our View. This should have been going on for the last few years and clearly has not been.
Really? I rather assumed that it had, albeit in a difficult cause and without obvious success. Our President is known in Government circles and I do not doubt that he raises the issue at every opportunity. Malcolm himself claims to have good connections. Rob is also on the Board and nobody is stopping him from trying. It isn't clear what the Board is being instructed to do here.
If you want a picture of the future, imagine a QR code stamped on a human face — forever.

Matthew Turner
Posts: 3600
Joined: Fri May 16, 2008 11:54 am

Re: Members' Representation

Post by Matthew Turner » Sun Sep 26, 2021 11:22 am

Chris Skulte wrote:
Fri Sep 24, 2021 10:26 am
Hi, thought I would reply to this as someone mentioned to me that there was some strong views on this forum.
I'm currently one of the bronze member reps.

1) I was voted in to represent the interests of Bronze members. As mentioned in my address at the time, I will be taking views in the interests of the bronze member category. (Not passing every decision onto them to vote on)

2) We (myself and Aga) have been open with everyone about how we will vote on all occasions - and feedback is always welcome from members. Yes some people have individual views, which we take on and consider in actions, as we are always looking to learn and grow and consider viewpoints which may have not been thought of. On the flip side of this, individuals often have strong opinions, but you are also one of many bronze members.

3) I nominated Malcolm for two reasons:
i) It is always good to to have some competition for key roles, and will only benefit members having an option on two alternative ways we can vote for.
ii) We put a position forward at the last council meeting regarding maximum length of service for positions. - Which we communicated to the member base on how we will vote (with minimal differing opinions returned), supporting that a change in leadership is useful over a longer period of time.

4) For the upcoming vote, I have spoken to Malcolm, and will speak to Mike this Sunday, and then we will be drafting a message to Bronze members, which will then be taken for consideration prior to the vote, as we have always done.

I don't see how anything poor has been done here, sure everyone is entitled to their opinions, but some of the comments I have seen on this forum are a little extreme....


On the flip side, all of our roles are open to votes, so if bronze members are no longer happy with the way in which I am using their vote (which I think on a side note is very very small number of votes), then there is governance in place where someone else can apply, and they can vote for a new representative.
That being said, not a single person decided to contest representing bronze members, and I put forward my nomination again on the 13th June. (mainly because no one else put their hand up), and as it was uncontested, I was voted in another year.


Hope that helps clarify my views on this.
Chris,
I have some questions - they are not directed at you or even this election they are just general musing on the whole members' reps topic.

Lets say there was an election between A and B and you felt strongly that A was by far the best candidate

20 members get in touch, 4 expressing a strong preference for A and 16 expressing a strong preference for B

How should a members' rep use their votes? Should you split your votes between candidates?

(similar points could of course be made about the 4NCL's 20 votes)

Kevin Thurlow
Posts: 5821
Joined: Wed Apr 30, 2008 12:28 pm

Re: Members' Representation

Post by Kevin Thurlow » Sun Sep 26, 2021 12:59 pm

"How should a members' rep use their votes? Should you split your votes between candidates?"

A good question.

I attended some BCF meetings in the 90s and I remember David Sedgwick holding loads of proxies, so he ended up casting something like 7 votes for A, 16 for B and 3 for none of the above. Everybody else seemed to be saying, I've got 20 votes, they are all for A (or B)...

Roger de Coverly
Posts: 21301
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 2:51 pm

Re: Members' Representation

Post by Roger de Coverly » Sun Sep 26, 2021 1:08 pm

Kevin Thurlow wrote:
Sun Sep 26, 2021 12:59 pm
I attended some BCF meetings in the 90s and I remember David Sedgwick holding loads of proxies, so he ended up casting something like 7 votes for A, 16 for B and 3 for none of the above.
More recently Ben Edgell similarly.

Post Reply