English Chess Forum

I am not happy with the decision to remove the official backing of the Federation from this forum, despite being an official of that same Federation. It is a backward,retrograde step.

Is the ECF really so petrified of free debate that they want to disassociate themselves from it?

The ECF can only benefit from open discussion, even if the discussion courts controversy.

What do others think and why was this decision taken?

Andrew

andrew martin wrote:I am not happy with the decision to remove the official backing of the Federation from this forum, despite being an official of that same Federation. It is a backward,retrograde step.

Is the ECF really so petrified of free debate that they want to disassociate themselves from it?

The ECF can only benefit from open discussion, even if the discussion courts controversy.

What do others think and why was this decision taken?

Andrew

I am still awaiting some sort of annoucement otherwise I will have to fill in the blanks myself

I feel the ECF missed an opportunity!
IMHO - They should have made the ECF Official Forum a ECF members only forum and not had it open to the public to read. This then could have been added to the benefits of been a ECF member, you get access.

May be they will have a re-think

Steve Henderson wrote:I feel the ECF missed an opportunity!
IMHO - They should have made the ECF Official Forum a ECF members only forum and not had it open to the public to read. This then could have been added to the benefits of been a ECF member, you get access.

May be they will have a re-think

If I closed the site here along with the grading site do you feel that anyone would provide alternates?

Carl Hibbard wrote:

Steve Henderson wrote:I feel the ECF missed an opportunity!
IMHO - They should have made the ECF Official Forum a ECF members only forum and not had it open to the public to read. This then could have been added to the benefits of been a ECF member, you get access.

May be they will have a re-think

If I closed the site here along with the grading site do you feel that anyone would provide alternates?

Who mentioned closing the site?

I also think the grading data base - *WHICH IS ACE* should also be a members only access.

Gotta take my hat off to you Carl for providing such fine services

You give your time and money providing these services, I feel they should not be for free!

The Forum and the grading database should all be ECF official, but for members only!
If you keep giving these super services for free, then the chess playing community will simply let you - !!

I have no idea who gave the order to remove the ECF Official Tag from this forum, I shall await the ECF Official announcement on the ECF official web site and not on here!

Carl you do a splendid job,

>>The Forum and the grading database should all be ECF official, but for members only!

I think that would cut off the input from other sources than members. A compromise would be a members only area.

The grading database should be open in my opinion. If the grading is paid for by game fee then restricting access to members only is a bit cheeky. Though if this changes to a grading only for paid members then I would agree it should be a members only area.

I do believe Carl should not have to do this out of his own pocket and should be paid to provide these services out of the grading budget.

The grading site must have a big impact on hits to the ECF website and should all be incorporated into raising the profile of the ECF, which I think you would lose if it was members only.

Paul Stimpson wrote:>>The Forum and the grading database should all be ECF official, but for members only!

I think that would cut off the input from other sources than members. A compromise would be a members only area.

The grading database should be open in my opinion. If the grading is paid for by game fee then restricting access to members only is a bit cheeky. Though if this changes to a grading only for paid members then I would agree it should be a members only area.

I do believe Carl should not have to do this out of his own pocket and should be paid to provide these services out of the grading budget.

The grading site must have a big impact on hits to the ECF website and should all be incorporated into raising the profile of the ECF, which I think you would lose if it was members only.

I am totally happy to provide both services free and without charge - the ECF board decision of the 7th of June was of course regrettable but outside of my control

I did argue that the loss of the "official" status was perhaps a killer and perhaps the forum should close - however it was suggested that it would be more helpful to remain in operation

This is still the case

It might be useful to note that FIDE refer to their forum as

Forum of World Chess federation
Public forum of World Chess Federation

rather than Official forum of FIDE

maybe we could use this label?

I read that SR would have us contact an ECF official to seek their opinion one by one.

I don't have the time or patience for this and, as the Romans were clever enough to invent the concept, this forum should be adequate.

Some examples of things that Romans introduced to Britain that are still in use today:
Architecture Art Literature Language
(Latin)
Sanitation
(sewage) Aqueducts Education Irrigation
( water supply)
The calendar Coins Cement and bricks Public heated baths
Turnips and carrots Paved streets and pavements Apples, pears and grapes Benefits (free food) for poor citizens
Roads Wine Cats Stinging nettles
Towns Glass Street Cleaners Shops
Laws Tenement Blocks Public order Firemen and Police
Parks Cabbages & peas Public libraries Public notices and advertisements

I would add to this list : the forum!

John

All right - fair enough.

But, apart from

Architecture
Art
Literature
Language (Latin)
Sanitation (sewage)
Aqueducts
Education
Irrigation ( water supply)
The calendar
Coins
Cement and bricks
Public heated baths
Turnips and carrots
Paved streets and pavements
Apples, pears and grapes
Benefits (free food) for poor citizens
Roads
Wine
Cats
Stinging nettles
Towns
Glass
Street Cleaners
Shops
Laws
Tenement Blocks
Public order
Firemen
Police
Parks
Cabbages & peas
Public libraries
Public notices and advertisements

And the forum (!), what have the Romans ever done for us?

What's life without a bit of Monty Python to liven it up, eh?

If (if...) the issues were primarily to do with legal responsibility, a better solution would have been stricter rules and forum moderation. The decision reflects poorly on the ECF and damages the pertinence of the forum. Btw, at times the discussion here didn't remind me much of the classical ideal of a forum - more of rotten vegetables being chucked at medieval stocks.

Limiting access to only ECF members would be highly unpopular with potential users of the formus/grading data.

I played for 4 years in the leagues before becoming a member of the ECF. I only joined because it was a requirement of the 4NCL (and I was asked to play). During those 4 years, I used the grading data to provide a grade estimation feature for our club Web site.

I think that if you restrict access to the forums, you will indeed kill it. Personally, I find it off-putting having to use my proper name -I expect this is why there are so few forum users. I only signed up because I had strong opnions on grading.

Edward Tandi wrote:I find it off-putting having to use my proper name

I can understand wanting to be A Nony Mouse on ICC / PlayChess / ChessCube but not on a forum.

Call me old fashioned...

I must admit, I didnt like the real name policy. But, given the degenerative nature of forums elsewhere I do think that the policy has kept the debate here civil.

John Upham wrote:

Edward Tandi wrote:I find it off-putting having to use my proper name

I can understand wanting to be A Nony Mouse on ICC / PlayChess / ChessCube but not on a forum.

Call me old fashioned...

What's the difference? Why not madate proper names on game servers? Because very few people would sign up to it that's why. The same applies to this forum.

I understand the need to maintain quality and I understand moderation is a large administrative overhead, but I think the forum could do with a few more participants. How many active users are there online? 20?

Perhaps this is where the ECF registration idea comes from. If we can link anonymous forum accounts to ECF membership details, the quality should not suffer too much because a) users play in the relevant circles and b) there is the threat of revoking membership if they misbehave.

But maybe there is another way. Why don't we allow anyone with an ECF grading reference to register? This ensures the relevance of the users comments, and if they misbehave, you just disable the forum account.

Do we know the ratio of people with ECF grading referncens to ECF direct members?