Who should the ECF Council elect as President?

[Sean Hewitt]

Many believe the current ECF voting system to be unrepresentative, fundamentally flawed, and wide open to abuse.

Possibly. Who are the 'many' of whom you speak, and could you elaborate on what you mean?

The Forum does at least consist of a number of people who show genuine interest in matters chess, who have shown a keen interest in the debates, and are prepared to ask serious and challenging questions about what is going on in our UK chess.

The ECF council consist of a number of people who show genuine interest in chess, and have shown a keen interest in the debates, and have got off their backsides to spend all day at the AGM to participate in those debates, and asked serious and challenging questions about what is going on. William Metcalfe described earlier his 17 hour day. If that doesn't show a keen interest in the debate...

For one, they listened to the point about modernising the voting system, and agreed to take that forward. It's a start.

[Andrew Zigmond]

Just following on from Sean's post it shouldn't be majorly difficult for anybody actually wanting to go to the Council meeting as a voting member to do so. I might be wrong but I can't imagine elections for league/ union delegates are that closely contested.

[Sean Hewitt]

Just following on from Sean's post it shouldn't be majorly difficult for anybody actually wanting to go to the Council meeting as a voting member to do so. I might be wrong but I can't imagine elections for league/ union delegates are that closely contested.

Indeed. There's no reason why forumites interested in electoral reform shouldn't contribute to the proposals that eventually eminate from this proposal.

[Mike Truran]

The Forum does at least consist of a number of people who show genuine interest in matters chess, who have shown a keen interest in the debates, and are prepared to ask serious and challenging questions about what is going on in our UK chess.

I don't always agree with William, but I take my hat off to his efforts to get to the ECF meeting. My day was much easier - setting off from home at 9.30 am and getting back at 8.30 pm, so only an 11 hour day on ECF business compared with William's 17 hours. On the other hand, I missed most of my son's birthday in the process.

David - what exactly did you do on Saturday for English chess apart from sitting on your arse all day and talking bo**ocks on the forum?

[Andrew Zigmond]

The Forum does at least consist of a number of people who show genuine interest in matters chess, who have shown a keen interest in the debates, and are prepared to ask serious and challenging questions about what is going on in our UK chess.

I don't always agree with William, but I take my hat off to his efforts to get to the ECF meeting. My day was much easier - setting off from home at 9.30 am and getting back at 8.30 pm, so only an 11 hour day on ECF business compared with William's 17 hours. On the other hand, I missed most of my son's birthday in the process.

David - what exactly did you do on Saturday for English chess apart from sitting on your arse all day and talking bo**ocks on the forum?

Well said Mike!

[Alex Holowczak]

The Forum does at least consist of a number of people who show genuine interest in matters chess, who have shown a keen interest in the debates, and are prepared to ask serious and challenging questions about what is going on in our UK chess.

I don't always agree with William, but I take my hat off to his efforts to get to the ECF meeting. My day was much easier - setting off from home at 9.30 am and getting back at 8.30 pm, so only an 11 hour day on ECF business compared with William's 17 hours. On the other hand, I missed most of my son's birthday in the process.

David - what exactly did you do on Saturday for English chess apart from sitting on your arse all day and talking bo**ocks on the forum?

Well said Mike!

I enjoyed Mike's hustings on Saturday when standing for the role of Chairman of the Finance Committee.

After a series of passionate speeches and Q&A sessions from other candidates for other positions, Mike said "Oh, I don't care; if someone else wants to do it, that's alright with me."

[Roger de Coverly]

The ECF council sadly has a long and undistinguished track record of questionable decisions, but it is shocking that so many of them were taken in by this egomaniac snake oil salesman, Paulson. His whole campaign was based on promises entirely unsupported by any evidence that they can or will be achieved, and the reason for his sudden interest in English chess remains unexplained. At best, yesterday's result represents the triumph of hope over reality. Those council members who elected Paulson must be the kind of people who get excited when they receive unsolicited e-mails from Nigeria, promising vast wealth if they will only hand over their bank account details.

So there's a challenge. Those who voted for Paulson and who have positions of influence with the ECF need to explain why they believe Liam is wrong.

His view is more or less echoed by one of his near contemporaries.
http://streathambrixtonchess.blogspot.c ... eting.html

I know Phil doesn't see it that way, but his challenge and the consequent reaction knocked out an otherwise outspoken blogger.

The Times Chess correspondent is enthusiastic about the new ECF President.

[John McKenna]

Some kind of Field of Dreams is the only hope I can give in answer to Liam, Roger and others who have doubts.

But, what do I know?

[JustinHadi]

I voted for Roger Edwards in the straw poll here (and for David Pardoe to suggest that two votes is a decisive victory shows he perhaps inhabits a different universe to the rest of us) and I have reservations about Andrew Paulson but I'm starting to find the attacks on here a bit wearing. Council has made their choice, let's see what Mr Paulson has to offer while keeping a close eye on his activities and holding him to account where necessary.

Exactly!

[David Pardoe]

Order, order....
This forums membership has spoken...they have said they`d like Roger Edwards as our ECF President, in an open and transparent vote/poll on this forum.
Funny how some people suddenly get hot and bothered and start blustering on their trumpets when they don't like the message.
Lets face it, Mr Paulson ran away from this forum half way through his campaign when he realised his `stunts` weren`t working.

Sean, we know you are fond of counting late votes, but could you please close your polling station now. The elections were two days ago.

Mike...you have launched into your torrent of abuse, as usual, as the red mist descended because you too don't like the message.
I wonder how many people are put off contributing to these forums, because they don't want that kind of gutter speak being hurled at them.
And I see that William is now your hero. Excellent choice. Some have branded him as grey, dull, and uninspiring.. Now who else was characterised in those terms?

How many block delegate/proxy votes is it you hold, and how many of Sean's block were you looking after at that ECF AGM stitch-up. Mind boggling.
Its no wonder the ECF `establishment` dont want to see OMOV...they might actually start to get some `true` results, which might not be convenient to some.

This house declares Roger Edwards as there preferred president.

[Simon Brown]

Will someone please remind me which planet I am on? Is it the same one as Mr Pardoe?

[Mike Truran]

David

I have no problem with your message. You can think what you like. As, I'm afraid, can I.

What I do have a problem with is:

1. The way you spend your time telling other people what they should be doing without actually doing anything yourself.

2. Your assumption that the unelected ecforum contributors are representative of English chess while the elected members of Council are not.

I'm afraid the 'message', whether you like it or not, is that Andrew Paulson was elected and Roger Edwards wasn't. No amount of polling by unelected ecforum posters is going to change that. If you had wanted to get some votes in your own right to try to influence the vote that actually mattered, you should have got off your backside and actually done some work for English chess to earn that right.

And by the way:

1. I held no proxy votes on Saturday.

2. I voted in favour of Sean's OMOV proposal.

Mike

[John Cox]

I’m fascinated by the tinfoil merchants who think that AP wants to get control of English chess in order somehow to benefit his own business interests.

Personally I wouldn’t have thought that, say, the county championship was quite so monetisable as all that.

Would anyone care to post an exposition of how AP’s financial masterplan to make himself a millionnaire at the expense of ECF members might work, exactly?

[Andrew Zigmond]

David, I try not to resort to mudslinging but what planet are you on?

1, Mr Paulson continued posting on this forum up until the last minute. Mr Edwards didn't even participate.

2, Mike didn't launch into a `torrent of abuse`. He asked you what you were doing for English Chess when other people were making long journeys to London to actually participate in the meeting. You haven't answered. Do you have an answer?

3, 41% of users on this forum have indeed elected Roger Edwards as THEIR preferred President. However ECF Council have chosen differently and that is the choice that matters in the real world. It's not the result I wanted but I accept it.

4, As has been pointed out to you several times Sean Hewitt has a mandate from Council to reform the voting system.

[Roger de Coverly]

Would anyone care to post an exposition of how AP’s financial masterplan to make himself a millionnaire at the expense of ECF members might work, exactly?

I have to say that's puzzling, but given how little he knows of English chess, he might assume there's bags of wealth ready for the stripping. Up to a point that's true, given the wealth locked away in the JRT and BCF PIF.

But if he believes in the fantasy of 6 million people in the UK having sufficient interest in chess that an advertiser will pay for rights to broadcast the Counties Championship, how long do you give him before it all unravels?

Those wrestling with the problems of financing the England teams in various competitions will no doubt take comfort with this exchange from the Yorkshire interview.

How do you envisage the national teams improve their standing?

Investment. Vision. Discipline.