ECF Code of Conduct

[Ray Sayers]

But that is just a list of members, not contributors to the forum.

Doesn't the 'posts' column give the number of times someone has posted, or am I missing something?

[Neill Cooper]

Most forum contributors are also active in promoting/supporting chess through organising events, developing/maintaining websites, running teams, coaching, chess administration etc.

Does it even matter if they aren't? Organisers are to an extent competing against each other and against other leisure activities, so they shouldn't disregard the views and opinions of players or chess parents.

My quote above should have started 'Many' not 'Most'. However, I think it is significant that so many are directly helping, particularly when it was claimed that 90% were not contributing much of value to the English chess scene.

[Neill Cooper]

But that is just a list of members, not contributors to the forum.

Doesn't the 'posts' column give the number of times someone has posted, or am I missing something?

Ah yes, so it does. The list sorted by number of posts is http://www.ecforum.org.uk/memberlist.ph ... &sk=d&sd=d

[JustinHorton]

I felt that the Code was far too wide and likely to give rise to a profusion of examples of the Law of Unintended Consequences.

Quite so.

Other questions also arise, for instance - why does the ECF think it should have the power to determine what people do or do not say when they are not acting in their ECF capacities?

I'm inclined to view this as a serious case of control-freakiness unless somebody can persuade me otherwise.

[Andrew Zigmond]

I don't want to get involved in the mudslinging but there are a couple of observations I'd like to make.

Firstly the loss of Sean Hewitt from this forum is a sad one. Although I didn't always agree with his approach he always did his best to answer genuine queries about ECF policies and queries. More to the point, unlike 90% percent of forum contributors he is actually contributing much of value to the English chess scene and deserves a lot more respect than he has sometimes been shown.

I can understand why Carl may want to nip this one in the bud but given that it was a complaint from Alan Burke that started this and his name is the thread title I feel he should be allowed to make a statement before his account is deactivated.

Several people appear to have taken this post, in particular the 90% of contributors part, out of context.

My point is this. Sean Hewitt is a member of the ECF board (and currently covering a post he never actively sought), the organiser of the E2-E4 tournament series which have been a massive success and also the controller of the open tournament at the London Chess Classic - he is probably involved with many other events and organisations as well. I'm sure the vast majority of forum contributors do their bit (as a club secretary and county league controller I like to think I do) but it would be ludicrous of me to suggest that I was on any sort of parity with Sean Hewitt - that's my point.

It's probably fair to say that Sean Hewitt doesn't tolerate fools gladly and there have been occasions when I've felt that his contributions were blunt and undiplomatic. However I think it is sad that he now feels that it is best for him to cease participating on this forum. We now need to look at how few members of the board are willing to use this forum to comment on matters of substance (I think Sean was the last one) and wonder if our favourite blogger may have had a point. A code of conduct works both ways and while we have every right to hold our (unpaid) officials to account we should show more respect than we sometimes do.

With regard to the code of conduct itself; I think it is important that the ECF has a mechanism to investigate any complaints impartially and take action or seek a resolution where necessary. This should not mean that every tiny exchange of words or difference of opinion gets blown completely out of proportion.

[Krishna Shiatis]

there have been occasions when I've felt that his contributions were blunt and undiplomatic.

To say the least. Also he is rude and mean and calls people names such as 'prat'. IMO he does not treat anyone who disagrees with him with respect. Just because he is running successful chess tournaments and being an ECF director, is he allowed to trample over people as he pleases?

he is actually contributing much of value to the English chess scene and deserves a lot more respect than he has sometimes been shown.

Perhaps if he was respectful himself, then people would feel that way towards him. Sean has been on this forum a long time before he became a director and has been rude for as long as I can remember to whomever he pleased. It seems now that he is a director of the ECF he will have to behave himself a little better. That can not be a bad thing surely?

[JustinHorton]

Sean has been on this forum a long time before he became a director and has been rude for as long as I can remember to whomever he pleased

If that's so - and I express no opinion other way - then it really might be better if people complained to the moderator of the forum rather than the ECF.

[Andrew Zigmond]

Just quickly, Krishna - I had your exchanges with Sean in mind when I wrote my post above and I agree that Sean didn't come out of that well. Unfortunately internet forums do have a tendency to bring out the worst in people.

Often the most bitter exchanges on here arise when there is a perceived lack of respect and I think there may be some learnings here.

Carl - is there a case for allowing Alan Burke to make any comment he wants to make and then locking this thread as neither he or Sean Hewitt are in a position to contribute to the debate and defend themselves?

[Carl Hibbard]

Carl - is there a case for allowing Alan Burke to make any comment he wants to make and then locking this thread as neither he or Sean Hewitt are in a position to contribute to the debate and defend themselves?

No, I receive more shall we say 'correspondance' either about Alan or from Alan than every other member of this forum combined so it is unlikely I will be reactivating his account

I may however need to close this thread yes

[Matthew Turner]

I hope this thread isn't closed, but I wonder if it should be renamed ECF code of Conduct, because really that is what it is about.

[Carl Hibbard]

I hope this thread isn't closed, but I wonder if it should be renamed ECF code of Conduct, because really that is what it is about.

That might be a good idea

For the record Alan was serving a one week ban which was due to end on Friday and this might have contributed to his taking the matter further

[IanDavis]

Maybe a poll on whether the code of conduct is a good thing or not would be in order?

[Clive Blackburn]

Brilliant idea yes, there should be a vote on the code of conduct, but of course no ECF official will be able to express an opinion either way because of the code of conduct!

[David Sedgwick]

Brilliant idea yes, there should be a vote on the code of conduct, but of course no ECF official will be able to express an opinion either way because of the code of conduct!

I'm in trouble if that's the case. I'm an ECF Officer, albeit not a Director, and I expressed an opinion on the Code of Conduct this morning. (Please see up thread.)

[Clive Blackburn]

Brilliant idea yes, there should be a vote on the code of conduct, but of course no ECF official will be able to express an opinion either way because of the code of conduct!

I'm in trouble if that's the case. I'm an ECF Officer, albeit not a Director, and I expressed an opinion on the Code of Conduct this morning. (Please see up thread.)

Yes David I saw that.... it all depends on the interpretation of the Code of Conduct I suppose.