The arbiter nexus

Debate directly related to English Chess Federation matters.
LawrenceCooper
Posts: 5104
Joined: Tue Dec 20, 2011 8:13 am

Re: The arbiter nexus

Post by LawrenceCooper » Wed Oct 21, 2015 10:57 am

John Foley wrote:I would have posted this on the official forum but I have learned that its days are numbered. Bill Phillips, ex local Councillor, charity trustee, league controller, entrepreneur and now ex ECF forum moderator has just resigned. He is the sort of person ECF can ill afford to lose but the organisation appears to be in meltdown.
Whilst it's always sad to hear of people leaving the federation and there have been plenty in the last two years I think someone who described themselves as "very abrasive and controversial" may not have been best suited to the role of moderator.

I think the federation will emerge stronger after the election results. Malcolm Pein and Julie Denning are both good additions to the board and whilst the federation has lost some experienced officers there will be others who now feel able to work with the federation who had previously been alienated and told they weren't up to the jobs that they were elected or appointed to.

User avatar
Michael Farthing
Posts: 1827
Joined: Fri Apr 04, 2014 1:28 pm
Location: Morecambe, Europe

Re: The arbiter nexus

Post by Michael Farthing » Wed Oct 21, 2015 10:59 am

John Foley wrote: I would have posted this on the official forum but I have learned that its days are numbered. Bill Phillips, ex local Councillor, charity trustee, league controller, entrepreneur and now ex ECF forum moderator has just resigned. He is the sort of person ECF can ill afford to lose but the organisation appears to be in meltdown.
Bill Phillips was the reason I ceased being a member of the ECF Forum. As moderator, he was logging in unacceptably rarely, but used such occasions to make ill-informed remarks about this forum. When these were shown to be false he made an attempt at a slight retraction which included in it a repetition of the incorrect and disgenuous information. Despite repeated calls for him to withdraw the allegation he never did and the forum management allowed the slur to remain. For a moderator to get away with making unfounded and manifestly disproved remarks about a rival organisation was too much.

I hope John's information is accurate. It would be a sceond step to putting the ECF forum on a proper footing, the first having already been taken by Council last Saturday.

Alan Kennedy
Posts: 137
Joined: Fri Mar 12, 2010 6:33 am

Re: The arbiter nexus

Post by Alan Kennedy » Wed Oct 21, 2015 11:10 am

LawrenceCooper wrote: I think the federation will emerge stronger after the election results. Malcolm Pein and Julie Denning are both good additions to the board and whilst the federation has lost some experienced officers there will be others who now feel able to work with the federation who had previously been alienated and told they weren't up to the jobs that they were elected or appointed to.
Carl it is regrettable you do not have a like button for comments such as the one above. I consider Lawrence has summed it up very well. Whilst an organisation never likes to lose people we can only hope that they continue to help the chess community grow in different ways free from the distraction of ECF management or forum moderation.
Last edited by Alan Kennedy on Wed Oct 21, 2015 11:11 am, edited 1 time in total.

Michael Flatt
Posts: 1232
Joined: Tue Jul 02, 2013 7:36 am
Location: Hertfordshire

Re: The arbiter nexus

Post by Michael Flatt » Wed Oct 21, 2015 11:11 am

John, whilst serving as a Non Executive Director on the Board you had ample opportunity to raise your concerns and have them discussed. If the Board chose not to support you then their decision has to be respected.

Openly confronting a serving Home Director with no prior notice nor coherent election strategy was doomed to fail. It was politically naive. To be successful in deposing an incumbent you needed to have offered a positive alternative and to have had credibility as a tournament organiser.

The role of Director of Home Chess requires attributes that you have yet to demonstrate and experience that you do not have. Unfortunately, being an Arbiter although not a necessary qualification is the sort of experience that is relevant. You should have followed the same course as the person you nominated as your replacement, who saw that he had no realistic chance of winning and withdrew saving unnecessary embarrassment.

I am aware of your work with Chess in Schools and have even attended one of your training courses for tutors which I enjoyed and found very beneficial. There is no doubt regarding your ability and commitment to education and that possibly is where you can continue to make a positive contribution to chess.

It is unfortunate that you found it necessary to step down from your previous position on the Board to fight a poorly thought out campaign against the serving Home Director who has a good track record in delivering successful ECF competitions.

Roger de Coverly
Posts: 18188
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 2:51 pm

Re: The arbiter nexus

Post by Roger de Coverly » Wed Oct 21, 2015 11:14 am

Michael Farthing wrote: When these were shown to be false he made an attempt at a slight retraction which included in it a repetition of the incorrect and disgenuous information.
official forum wrote:Which bit is nonsense Carl? just the fact that despite the vast majority of users on ecforum use their real names but some use an alias, ie ecforum allow the use of an alias and this forum is trying to stop its use altogether.
I'm not sure there's been much moderation in the past month or two. Has anyone spotted the various rants and personal insults by John Foley, Chris Fegan and Martin Regan being trimmed?

Alan Kennedy
Posts: 137
Joined: Fri Mar 12, 2010 6:33 am

Re: The arbiter nexus

Post by Alan Kennedy » Wed Oct 21, 2015 11:15 am

Michael Flatt wrote: Openly confronting a serving Home Director with no prior notice nor coherent election strategy was doomed to fail.
Michael is it not time to be generous in victory and move on. Clearly John has a lot to offer chess including the CSC community and therefore I wish him well in his efforts.

John Foley
Posts: 293
Joined: Thu Oct 15, 2009 9:58 am
Location: Kingston-upon-Thames
Contact:

Re: The arbiter nexus

Post by John Foley » Wed Oct 21, 2015 11:23 am

Michael Flatt wrote:It is unfortunate that you found it necessary to step down from your previous position on the Board to fight a poorly thought out campaign against the serving Home Director who has a good track record in delivering successful ECF competitions.
One of the many problems in the constitution of ECF is that Directorships are only for one year so neither I nor the Home Director stepped down - these were posts for election. If Council accept the Independent Governance Commission Report and make posts three years, we will avoid a lot of aggravation. I found out a great deal about the election process which I can share with anybody else who is motivated to serve the ECF: a) It has nothing to do with policies, it is who you know; b )You need to have a large email list because ECF rules do not allow direct contact with voters or members - and I play to the rules; c) it is instructive to read the list of nominations and proxies because it explains the power bases.

Michael Flatt
Posts: 1232
Joined: Tue Jul 02, 2013 7:36 am
Location: Hertfordshire

Re: The arbiter nexus

Post by Michael Flatt » Wed Oct 21, 2015 11:28 am

Alan Kennedy wrote:
Michael Flatt wrote: Openly confronting a serving Home Director with no prior notice nor coherent election strategy was doomed to fail.
Michael is it not time to be generous in victory and move on. Clearly John has a lot to offer chess including the CSC community and therefore I wish him well in his efforts.
Michael Flatt wrote:Openly confronting a serving Home Director with no prior notice nor coherent election strategy was doomed to fail. It was politically naive. To be successful in deposing an incumbent you needed to have offered a positive alternative and to have had credibility as a tournament organiser.
I think it makes sense to read the full paragraph or even the entire my post to understand what I said. My comments relate to John Foley's continuing assertion that he was confronting a conspiracy by an all powerful organiser-arbiter nexus.

Martin Regan

Re: The arbiter nexus

Post by Martin Regan » Wed Oct 21, 2015 11:37 am

It is unfortunate that the forum does not have an automatic "green ink mode" where we would better be able to spot the obsessive ramblings of the Grade Finder in Chief.

However, what most of the sensible comments have missed - the elephant in the room, if you like - is that the ECF is not living up to and has never lived up to its full potential.

In short, it is not achieving a fraction of what those who know it well believe it capable of.

John Foley has put forward one of the reasons why he believes this to be the case, my own experience suggests to me that his argument has some merit.

If he and the outgoing chief executive and commercial director, the current President and the incoming international director all believe this to be the case then those who disagree need to put some bones on their disagreement. And if possible come up with a better reason why the federation is performing as it is.

Roger de Coverly
Posts: 18188
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 2:51 pm

Re: The arbiter nexus

Post by Roger de Coverly » Wed Oct 21, 2015 11:43 am

John Foley wrote: a) It has nothing to do with policies, it is who you know
So what's new? There was a contested election for non-Exec Director last year. By virtue of your leading role with CSC, you were better known than at least one of your opponents.
John Foley wrote: You need to have a large email list because ECF rules do not allow direct contact with voters or members
I would have thought there a way round that. The membership list of both this forum and the official one is comprehensive if not necessarily representative. Those named as Representative Members could be contacted via PM. It might otherwise be a matter of using the grading list to identify where forum contributors came from, contacting them and asking to be put in touch with the vote holders.

Isn't the ban on direct contact just a ban on using ECF material such as its membership and mailing lists? That would seem necessary as otherwise it favours those with access to such material. I would presume that your election address and Director's report would have been sent to all voters, a link to them at the vry least.
John Foley wrote: c) it is instructive to read the list of nominations and proxies because it explains the power bases.
The long list of Leagues, Congresses and County Associations was unnecessary since it was only required for an incumbent Director to nominate himself or herself. I saw it as a statement that the last minute appearance of a rival candidate was not considered welcome by many of those entitled to vote. Otherwise it is interesting and will sometimes reveal those with votes not acting in consultation with their organisations.

Alan Kennedy
Posts: 137
Joined: Fri Mar 12, 2010 6:33 am

Re: The arbiter nexus

Post by Alan Kennedy » Wed Oct 21, 2015 11:45 am

Michael Flatt wrote: I think it makes sense to read the full paragraph or even the entire my post to understand what I said. My comments relate to John Foley's continuing assertion that he was confronting a conspiracy by an all powerful organiser-arbiter nexus.
You are correct Michael, apologies. I had not read John's post. Again I suggest his comments are not well founded.

Alan Kennedy
Posts: 137
Joined: Fri Mar 12, 2010 6:33 am

Re: The arbiter nexus

Post by Alan Kennedy » Wed Oct 21, 2015 11:47 am

Martin Regan wrote:the obsessive ramblings of the Grade Finder in Chief.
No one deserves this sort of abuse. You do a discredit to your arguments by using it.

Martin Regan

Re: The arbiter nexus

Post by Martin Regan » Wed Oct 21, 2015 11:49 am

Alan,
I must have missed your interjections when I am routinely accused of "ranting". Address the argument.

NickFaulks
Posts: 5172
Joined: Sat Jan 02, 2010 1:28 pm

Re: The arbiter nexus

Post by NickFaulks » Wed Oct 21, 2015 11:50 am

Martin Regan wrote: John Foley has put forward one of the reasons why he believes this to be the case
....
If he and the outgoing chief executive and commercial director, the current President and the incoming international director all believe this to be the case then those who disagree need to put some bones on their disagreement. And if possible come up with a better reason why the federation is performing as it is.
Really? If you have any information as to the thinking of the current President, please feel free to share it.

User avatar
Michael Farthing
Posts: 1827
Joined: Fri Apr 04, 2014 1:28 pm
Location: Morecambe, Europe

Re: The arbiter nexus

Post by Michael Farthing » Wed Oct 21, 2015 11:51 am

Martin Regan wrote: If he and the outgoing chief executive and commercial director, the current President and the incoming international director all believe this to be the case then those who disagree need to put some bones on their disagreement. And if possible come up with a better reason why the federation is performing as it is.
Well this close-knit group fought and lost the argument. I do agree that the election was not really about the argument, but that is partly because the Phil Ehr group did not put forward an 'argument' - relying on terms such as 'progressive', 'modern', forward looking'. I suggested earlier that Martin might spell out what he understood by 'progressive' (preferably, I add now, with some concrete examples) but the reply from him (apart from the personal abuse) was a list of some things that progressive was not. I was also accused of writing against 'progressiveness' while admitting that I didn't know what it was. That was not actually the case: I have a very clear idea of what I think the Phil Ehr group meant by it, but I was hoping that Martin might set out clearly what his understanding was. From there might have come a prospect of discussing both whether such a view of the ECF's role was desirable, wanted, achievable or better pursued by the Phil Ehr group (I wonder if could promote them to a nexus :? ) rather than the current Board.

Post Reply