ECF Annual General Meeting 13 October 2012

[Sean Hewitt]

In my first job as a non-exec director, I agreed to try to obtain the BCF PIF accounts which have not been seen for two years. I now have them, and will be emailing them to the board in a few minutes.

[John Upham]

In my first job as a non-exec director, I agreed to try to obtain the BCF PIF accounts which have not been seen for two years. I now have them, and will be emailing them to the board in a few minutes.

Any interesting headlines from those accounts?

[Mick Norris]

Alex Holowczak wrote

Why can't all Council meetings be in Birmingham?

Because of the requirements of the Procedural Bye Laws. If you are elected as Director of Home Chess today, you will become a requisitionist in your own right, and able to propose amendments to the Bye Laws. Any such change would be unpopular with the Office staff: quite apart from the travelling involved for them, it was pointed out to me yesterday that the Birmingham Ibis costs the ECF noticeably more than the Euston Square Hotel.

As an aside (although it is not actually off topic) has anybody ever heard the one about the Directed Proxy form that indicated votes for Rupert Jones AND Nigel Short AND Neither of the above?

At least they ensured a vote for the winning candidate, and when asked "did you vote for me?" can say yes!

[Alex Holowczak]

One reason why it might be beneficial to hold meetings in Birmingham was that people stayed until 6:30pm this time. In London, about 1/3 of the meeting had disappeared by 5:30pm; particularly those who had to travel a long way north. On the other hand, they might just have booked later tickets this time...

[John Cox]

Good grief. Not for the first time it's brought home to me what an utter pack of idiots the ECF Council are. I suppose if I could be bothered to follow some of these links I could find out which idiots they are exactly, but I can't.

The most irritating thing is their ridiculous prejudice against people who actually, y'know, contribute anything to British chess.

[Peter Sowray]

Council's treatment of Adam Raoof is shameful.

[Richard Bates]

Anyway, what's Stephen Giddins' history with Adam?

[John Upham]

Council's treatment of Adam Raoof is shameful.

I suspect there were three factors operating here:

1. Not producing an election manifesto/statement
2. Not attending the meeting
3. Comments made about the Grand Prix prize giving and other matters.

I am not privy to the full details. Maybe those who made those comments could enlighten us by putting them in this place?

n.b. As a footnote I would add that all of above are not concerns of mine but they might be concerns of those who attend ECF Council meetings.

[Richard Bates]

Council's treatment of Adam Raoof is shameful.

I suspect there were three factors operating here:

1. Not producing an election manifesto/statement
2. Not attending the meeting
3. Comments made about the Grand Prix prize giving and other matters.

I am not privy to the full details. Maybe those who made those comments could enlighten us by putting them in this place?

Possibly also that, unlike with some of the other more highly trailed 'contests', a large number at the meeting maybe hadn't been delegated to vote in a certain way in advance - so in the heat of the moment took it upon themselves to take a decision that hadn't been really thought about in great detail based on a short discussion at the AGM itself? A discussion over which Adam himself had no power to influence.

[Alex McFarlane]

I suspect there were three factors operating here:

1. Not producing an election manifesto/statement
2. Not attending the meeting
3. Comments made about the Grand Prix prize giving and other matters.

I am not privy to the full details. Maybe those who made those comments could enlighten us by putting them in this place?

I raised the first point. Others made 2 and 3.
I see nothing wrong with commenting that someone seeking election to a new position should give an explanation of their reasons and intentions. It is, in my opinion, a necessity in such situations.
I would also suggest that there were more than those three factors raised at the meeting.

Can I just point out that my relationship with Adam Raoof deteriorated significantly following Sheffield, as it did with several other ECF officials. Whilst this did have some influence on the way I feel it was a minor consideration compared to others that I do not feel it would be right to go into in a public forum. As things stand I would be unable to work with Adam.

For the removal of doubt, I had similar feelings about Stewart Reuben following Sheffield but we now have resolved our differences and are happy to resume our relationship. I have, I think, a good working relationship with the newly appointed Home Director. I state this in the hope (probably futile) that my motives for highlighting the lack of a manifesto will not be misconstrued.

[John Cox]

Who *are* these people?? I mean, seriously. WTF is Ben Edgell, for example?

And why on earth are arbiters half-running the Council (supposing that statement to be true). Arbiters are useful and all, but at the same time they're just functionaries.

[Alex Holowczak]

I mean, seriously. WTF is Ben Edgell, for example?

Ben is the former ECF Publicity Officer, who is very active in the west country, and represents the Bristol League and Somerset.

He's one of just three people who attended Council who were born after 1986. I say that because we have a shortage of people willing to get involved in any sort of chess administration of my kind of age as it is, without this sort of comment.

He's also got good virtues as Council goes. He actively puts things on the Agenda if he feels the ECF should discuss it, rather than moan about things he doesn't like. OK, the proposal he had this time was rejected, but at least he showed some gumption to be proactive about it.

[Jonathan Rogers]

....

And why on earth are arbiters half-running the Council (supposing that statement to be true). Arbiters are useful and all, but at the same time they're just functionaries.

As it happens, I believe that I count at least four on the Board too. I hasten to add that many of them do other things too, and they might not be regarded as primarily arbiters. Even so, the over-representation of people with the arbiter qualification in ECF politics is quite striking.

[Mike Truran]

Ben Edgell was the ECF's publicity office, who had the courage both to put himself up for a post and to resign when he felt he wasn't doing the job he should have been doing. If you don't like the way Council is run, you might want to think about standing for office yourself and changing the system.

As for your 'just functionaries' comment, at least arbiters make the effort to put the structure in place to enable competitive chess to take place. All people like you have to do is find your way to the board, sit down and play.

BTW WHF is John Cox, for example?

[Mick Norris]

....

And why on earth are arbiters half-running the Council (supposing that statement to be true). Arbiters are useful and all, but at the same time they're just functionaries.

As it happens, I believe that I count at least four on the Board too. I hasten to add that many of them do other things too, and they might not be regarded as primarily arbiters. Even so, the over-representation of people with the arbiter qualification in ECF politics is quite striking.

It is hard work getting players, pretty strong ones, involved

Whether this fault lies with the players, the ECF or neither I don't know