Members' Representation
-
- Posts: 1139
- Joined: Wed Aug 31, 2011 6:33 pm
Re: Members' Representation
I thought the intention of the will was financial support for the British Championship.
Nothing else, however much we may wish for it.
Nothing else, however much we may wish for it.
-
- Posts: 2153
- Joined: Thu May 15, 2008 1:37 am
Re: Members' Representation
Kevin, you said similar on 18 September.Kevin Thurlow wrote: ↑Tue Oct 05, 2021 5:04 pm"The intentions of legators cannot just be ignored."
They certainly shouldn't be, but I thought there was disagreement about the contents of JR's will?
...and Alex McFarlane and I responded:Kevin Thurlow wrote: ↑Sat Sep 18, 2021 9:04 amThe argument about the John Robinson money (which was an altruistic donation) goes back many years. My understanding was that it was left for "chess", but it was quickly hijacked by a small group who insisted it should be used just for junior chess, and (from memory) they seemed unwilling to produce any accounts or say what they were doing - the usual BCF secrecy. Other bequests just seemed to disappear or create huge arguments.
Do you have any information to support your belief - I'm not saying you are wrong but I'm skeptical? (My understanding, FWIW, is based on what I recall David Welch, a friend of John Robinson's and one of the trustees of the JRYCT told the 2016 ECF AGM - unfortunately it wasn't minuted.)Alex McFarlane wrote: ↑Sat Sep 18, 2021 9:39 amMost definitely NOT correct.
It is also used to support the British Championships and junior participation at Hastings, two things which John held dear to his heart.
I believe the Trustees hold the independence of these funds close to their hearts too.
Without sounding too much like an American politician, I knew John, and although I had no idea he had so much money or that he was going to leave it to chess (and his church), we had several conversations (which I thought hypothetical) on how he would have liked to promote chess. I firmly believe that the Trustees are following his wishes.
-
- Posts: 5837
- Joined: Wed Apr 30, 2008 12:28 pm
Re: Members' Representation
I recall an individual getting cross about the will - whether he had any good reason to do so is another matter!
-
- Posts: 5249
- Joined: Mon Apr 09, 2007 5:56 pm
- Location: Croydon
Re: Members' Representation
Mick and others, please see the thread at viewtopic.php?f=25&t=8988.Mick Norris wrote: ↑Tue Oct 05, 2021 3:47 pmIf, as I understand, the £154K was left from John Robinson's Will, then it can't be used for purposes not specified by him
There's a fundamental lack of understanding here
On Page 7 Roger de Coverly quotes verbatim Richard Haddrell's report of the meeting which established the John Robinson Trust. On Page 9 I describe the terms of John Robinson's will, a copy of which I had obtained.
-
- Posts: 1139
- Joined: Wed Aug 31, 2011 6:33 pm
Re: Members' Representation
I wish I hadn't been directed to that historic thread.
I see the same intemperate rants we have got used to on more recent threads!
I see the same intemperate rants we have got used to on more recent threads!
-
- Posts: 2153
- Joined: Thu May 15, 2008 1:37 am
Re: Members' Representation
Thanks David, that's helpful. So there was definite merit in Kevin's recollection. But also I think it matters what friends of John Robinson believe he would have wished. Is that fair?David Sedgwick wrote: ↑Tue Oct 05, 2021 6:03 pmMick and others, please see the thread at viewtopic.php?f=25&t=8988.Mick Norris wrote: ↑Tue Oct 05, 2021 3:47 pmIf, as I understand, the £154K was left from John Robinson's Will, then it can't be used for purposes not specified by him
There's a fundamental lack of understanding here
On Page 7 Roger de Coverly quotes verbatim Richard Haddrell's report of the meeting which established the John Robinson Trust. On Page 9 I describe the terms of John Robinson's will, a copy of which I had obtained.
-
- Posts: 2153
- Joined: Thu May 15, 2008 1:37 am
Re: Members' Representation
Has there been any consultation - either with team captains or players - about how the 4NCL might cast its *20* votes?Roger de Coverly wrote: ↑Thu Sep 30, 2021 3:04 pmThose on the 4NCL mailing list will also have received election material from Mike Truran. Much of it is material sent to Council members which has probably already been published.
I will however quote the opening paragraphSix of the representatives have 6 votes each, whilst the other four have one each. So that's 40 in total compared with the 4NCL's 30. The ECF's membership rules on the other hand mean that very few 4NCL players will be Bronze or Silver, therefore have no particular influence on those representatives.As you may know, eight ECF Board and other positions (two of them contested) are up for election at the ECF’s AGM on 16 October. As 4NCL players you have as much a right as anybody to have your views heard at the AGM, and the way for you to do that is to make representations to your Direct Members’ Representatives, who wield significant numbers of votes in their own right at ECF meetings. See below on how to do this.
What it doesn't say is how the 4NCL's votes will be cast, although there may be no need to ask.
-
- Posts: 7259
- Joined: Tue Dec 20, 2011 8:13 am
Re: Members' Representation
Yes, 4NCL captains received an e-mail on 29th September asking for comments on how the 4NCL should cast their votes along with their recommendation.Angus French wrote: ↑Tue Oct 05, 2021 9:52 pmHas there been any consultation - either with team captains or players - about how the 4NCL might cast its *20* votes?Roger de Coverly wrote: ↑Thu Sep 30, 2021 3:04 pmThose on the 4NCL mailing list will also have received election material from Mike Truran. Much of it is material sent to Council members which has probably already been published.
I will however quote the opening paragraphSix of the representatives have 6 votes each, whilst the other four have one each. So that's 40 in total compared with the 4NCL's 30. The ECF's membership rules on the other hand mean that very few 4NCL players will be Bronze or Silver, therefore have no particular influence on those representatives.As you may know, eight ECF Board and other positions (two of them contested) are up for election at the ECF’s AGM on 16 October. As 4NCL players you have as much a right as anybody to have your views heard at the AGM, and the way for you to do that is to make representations to your Direct Members’ Representatives, who wield significant numbers of votes in their own right at ECF meetings. See below on how to do this.
What it doesn't say is how the 4NCL's votes will be cast, although there may be no need to ask.
-
- Posts: 2153
- Joined: Thu May 15, 2008 1:37 am
Re: Members' Representation
Thanks Lawrence. Given previous postings I wasn't completely sure that would be the case but I'm pleased it is.LawrenceCooper wrote: ↑Tue Oct 05, 2021 10:27 pmYes, 4NCL captains received an e-mail on 29th September asking for comments on how the 4NCL should cast their votes along with their recommendation.Angus French wrote: ↑Tue Oct 05, 2021 9:52 pmHas there been any consultation - either with team captains or players - about how the 4NCL might cast its *20* votes?Roger de Coverly wrote: ↑Thu Sep 30, 2021 3:04 pmThose on the 4NCL mailing list will also have received election material from Mike Truran. Much of it is material sent to Council members which has probably already been published.
I will however quote the opening paragraph
Six of the representatives have 6 votes each, whilst the other four have one each. So that's 40 in total compared with the 4NCL's 30. The ECF's membership rules on the other hand mean that very few 4NCL players will be Bronze or Silver, therefore have no particular influence on those representatives.
What it doesn't say is how the 4NCL's votes will be cast, although there may be no need to ask.
-
- Posts: 5249
- Joined: Mon Apr 09, 2007 5:56 pm
- Location: Croydon
Re: Members' Representation
Yes it is fair, but I don't think that there is a consensus about that either. However, I regard that as a rather pointless discussion.Angus French wrote: ↑Tue Oct 05, 2021 8:28 pmThanks David, that's helpful. So there was definite merit in Kevin's recollection. But also I think it matters what friends of John Robinson believe he would have wished. Is that fair?
I make no apology for putting the record straight, but we are where we are. The John Robinson Trust is a reality and endless wrangling about whether John Robinson would or would not have wished it to be set up is not going to get us anywhere.
John hated confrontation. He would have been horrified by all the arguments which his legacy has caused.
-
- Posts: 1139
- Joined: Wed Aug 31, 2011 6:33 pm
Re: Members' Representation
No apology expected or needed, David. Merely a satirical observation that the passing of the years has not mellowed the tone of the debate.
-
- Posts: 5249
- Joined: Mon Apr 09, 2007 5:56 pm
- Location: Croydon
Re: Members' Representation
Nick, my comments were not made in response to your post, for the very bad reason that I had missed it until this morning.Nick Ivell wrote: ↑Wed Oct 06, 2021 8:45 amNo apology expected or needed, David. Merely a satirical observation that the passing of the years has not mellowed the tone of the debate.
I agree with you about the déjà vu.
-
- Posts: 677
- Joined: Sun Aug 30, 2009 10:51 pm
- Location: Manchester
Re: Members' Representation
So far I have received 33 replies included myself
So hope for a few more this week and make sure your voice is heard
So hope for a few more this week and make sure your voice is heard
Any postings on here represent my personal views only and also Dyslexia as well
-
- Posts: 10382
- Joined: Tue Apr 17, 2007 10:12 am
- Location: Bolton, Greater Manchester
Re: Members' Representation
Thanks for the clarification David, very helpful, although I wish I'd not decided to not to read the whole threadDavid Sedgwick wrote: ↑Tue Oct 05, 2021 6:03 pmMick and others, please see the thread at viewtopic.php?f=25&t=8988.Mick Norris wrote: ↑Tue Oct 05, 2021 3:47 pmIf, as I understand, the £154K was left from John Robinson's Will, then it can't be used for purposes not specified by him
There's a fundamental lack of understanding here
On Page 7 Roger de Coverly quotes verbatim Richard Haddrell's report of the meeting which established the John Robinson Trust. On Page 9 I describe the terms of John Robinson's will, a copy of which I had obtained.
Any postings on here represent my personal views
-
- Posts: 677
- Joined: Sun Aug 30, 2009 10:51 pm
- Location: Manchester
Re: Members' Representation
So far just to let you know i have received 33 replies so far
With the chief executive roles before Malcolm pull out I received the following
Mike 16
Malcolm 12
For the chair of government committee
Robert stern 17
Chris Fegan 3
Other did not put anything down
For the other agenda point only 2 people have replied
And it was
Against on all off them
With the chief executive roles before Malcolm pull out I received the following
Mike 16
Malcolm 12
For the chair of government committee
Robert stern 17
Chris Fegan 3
Other did not put anything down
For the other agenda point only 2 people have replied
And it was
Against on all off them
Any postings on here represent my personal views only and also Dyslexia as well