ECF elections 2016

[Michael Farthing]

Now and then, Gary, but none as helpful as yours.

It's your use of complete sentences, Justin, that really lets you down.

[JustinHorton]

Too true.

[Andrew Zigmond]

It is an interesting read. For a relatively short document there is one hell of a lot to pick over as well.

How have so many people seen this second document?

I have already been "advised" against its publication.

For the avoidance of confusion I was referring to the first document which Mick Norris linked to. I haven't seen the second document as of yet.

My understanding is that the document was sent to all members of council with no request for complete confidentiality. If the contents are potentially libelous it should not be on a public forum.

[Carl Hibbard]

I am not sure why if a great deal of influential people have seen it why the rank and file are now prevented?

[Michael Farthing]

For the avoidance of confusion I was referring to the first document which Mick Norris linked to. I haven't seen the second document as of yet.

My understanding is that the document was sent to all members of council with no request for complete confidentiality. If the contents are potentially libelous it should not be on a public forum.

Ah similarly. I have not seen it either. My comment was my usual facetiousness and was suggesting that invective from PE harms PE and no one else.

Though a member of Council I did not receive the Email, but I have previously made it very clear (umm.. rather rudely ) by Email to PE that I did not wish any further communication from him, so he seems to have respected my wishes.

[Michael Farthing]

I am not sure why if a great deal of influential people have seen it why the rank and file are now prevented?

Because you are not allowing its publication, Carl. Simples.

[Carl Hibbard]

I am not sure why if a great deal of influential people have seen it why the rank and file are now prevented?

Because you are not allowing its publication, Carl. Simples.

Advised but not even seen it yet.

[Gary Kenworthy]

Electoral document 1:
I have heard and listen to speeches and manifestos, of varying organsations, debated and discussed them before.
Just a few points.
Overloaded with 4NCL ? -- Reminds one I heard years ago that there too many chess players on the Board.
(Raiding) revenues surpluses, that also comes up over the years.
(any chance) of Lottery (best say how with all avenues closed), Trusts, [by deed] (money been liberated from those too often).
Yes, such a strategy would transform the ECF, or anyone organisation. (cf former PM MacMillan. At first the family silver goes, speech).
Professional. One assumes fees and pay.
FYI: I would have voted against that my day.
- rgds - (FM) GK

[Gary Kenworthy]

in my day

[Andrew Zigmond]

I'm assuming most of us contributing to this part of the discussion (the thread dates back some weeks) have seen the first document. I'm speculating but it seems likely the second document increases the ferocity of the attack. While nobody would claim the views expressed are anything except that of the original author; the person(s) sharing it or the forum owner would have to take some responsibility for putting it in the public domain.

[Carl Hibbard]

I'm assuming most of us contributing to this part of the discussion (the thread dates back some weeks) have seen the first document. I'm speculating but it seems likely the second document increases the ferocity of the attack. While nobody would claim the views expressed are anything except that of the original author; the person(s) sharing it or the forum owner would have to take some responsibility for putting it in the public domain.

Sounds a bit the party line Andrew?

[Andrew Zigmond]

Overloaded with 4NCL ? -- Reminds one I heard years ago that there too many chess players on the Board.

Three at a current count, only two of whom seem to be involved with the business side of the 4NCL. A senior 4NCL figure did stand for Director of Junior Chess a few years back before withdrawing in favour of the other candidate; it was believed she did so with PE's endorsement. Two members of the current board seem to be involved with CSC and that might increase to three after the October elections.

The interesting thing is why this was not raised last year when two other directors were challenged and subjected to intense personal criticism from their opponents? I might be overstepping the mark here but I think it needs to be said.

[Carl Hibbard]

Overloaded with 4NCL ? -- Reminds one I heard years ago that there too many chess players on the Board.

Three at a current count, only two of whom seem to be involved with the business side of the 4NCL. A senior 4NCL figure did stand for Director of Junior Chess a few years back before withdrawing in favour of the other candidate; it was believed she did so with PE's endorsement. Two members of the current board seem to be involved with CSC and that might increase to three after the October elections.

The interesting thing is why this was not raised last year when two other directors were challenged and subjected to intense personal criticism from their opponents? I might be overstepping the mark here but I think it needs to be said.

Who is the third anyone know?

[Gary Kenworthy]

Document 1 is sufficient as it sets the tone and style. It is inappropriate, misleading, dangerous and bias. It is a request for a blank cheque-book.
The final defence would be, but - I was elected to do these acts.
It needs to be refuted in the same style and vein, because it asked for the reaction in that way.

It saves others, who might feel it personal. Whilst I am independent to this process.
It is an appropriate response because of the high risks it offers, as per Maslow's hierarchy - rgds GK

[LawrenceCooper]

Overloaded with 4NCL ? -- Reminds one I heard years ago that there too many chess players on the Board.

Three at a current count, only two of whom seem to be involved with the business side of the 4NCL. A senior 4NCL figure did stand for Director of Junior Chess a few years back before withdrawing in favour of the other candidate; it was believed she did so with PE's endorsement. Two members of the current board seem to be involved with CSC and that might increase to three after the October elections.

The interesting thing is why this was not raised last year when two other directors were challenged and subjected to intense personal criticism from their opponents? I might be overstepping the mark here but I think it needs to be said.

Who is the third anyone know?

I guess Dave Thomas as he's a 4NCL arbiter.