Emergency Board Meeting - Draft Minutes

[Roger de Coverly]

The board putting this motion before council doesn't imply that they will then support the motion

The way it is worded on the website suggests the Board are recommending the meeting votes for it.

The Board recommends that the ECF Council at its April meeting approves a Motion to give Andrew Paulson standing during the ECU General Assembly election meeting in Tromsø in August by designating him as the official ECF Delegate at that meeting.

With a number of Directors also having Council votes controlled by themselves, let alone proxies, there might already be committed support.

Conveniently for the Board the whole announcement is made after the deadline for submitting motions or topics for discussion.

[Rob Thompson]

The board putting this motion before council doesn't imply that they will then support the motion, in much the same way that Phil Ehr proposed the vote of (no) confidence and the abstained.

The Board recommends that the ECF Council at its April meeting approves a Motion to give Andrew Paulson standing during the ECU General Assembly election meeting in Tromsø in August by designating him as the official ECF Delegate at that meeting.

Take Sean as an example. His (singular) board vote may well support the motion, but his (multiple) e2e4 votes may well go against, especially if he receives a lot of messages lobbying to that effect. The board as a whole is, in terms of council votes, considerably less than the sum of its parts.

[Angus French]

Do the Board or its members have votes at Council?

Board members each have a vote as do the immediate past President and the immediate past Chief Executive - at least that's what the Articles of Association say. However, when CJ resigned before the 2012 AGM, the Governance Committee determined that although he was the immediate past President, CJ didn't have a vote - it went to the President before, IIRC.
See here for voting entitlements at the 2013 AGM: http://www.englishchess.org.uk/wp-conte ... -8-Oct.pdf

[Roger de Coverly]

Take Sean as an example. His (singular) board vote may well support the motion, but his (multiple) e2e4 votes may well go against, especially if he receives a lot of messages lobbying to that effect.

Nothing compels him to take the slightest notice of anything the participants in the e2e4 tournaments might say. It can be different for county and league representatives if they are required to account for their actions to a Committee or AGM.

[Angus French]

Take Sean as an example. His (singular) board vote may well support the motion, but his (multiple) e2e4 votes may well go against, especially if he receives a lot of messages lobbying to that effect. The board as a whole is, in terms of council votes, considerably less than the sum of its parts.

Sure. The ECF Board would have no right to say how the e2e4 votes are cast.

[Angus French]

Also, in the absence of a President, someone will be needed to chair the April Council meeting - presumably the Chief Executive. If so this would be a little ironic (given that the President chaired the early post-AGM Board Meetings when it should have been the Chief Executive).

[Roger de Coverly]

Sure. The ECF Board would have no right to say how the e2e4 votes are cast.

We don't know what went on behind closed doors, but the "let's stitch up Nigel" resolution has more chance of success if Board members' other votes are placed in favour of the motion.

Zurab may be far to well known to Council members for all the wrong reasons for them to want to be seen to endorse him for ECU President. Perhaps when we next play in events where one of the ECF Directors is an arbiter, we should ask our opponents if it's OK to take moves back.

[JustinHorton]

Take Sean as an example. His (singular) board vote may well support the motion, but his (multiple) e2e4 votes may well go against, especially if he receives a lot of messages lobbying to that effect.

So in effect they'd be lobbying him to vote against his personal commitment? That rocks.

[PeterFarr]

Zurab may be far to well known to Council members for all the wrong reasons for them to want to be seen to endorse him for ECU President. Perhaps when we next play in events where one of the ECF Directors is an arbiter, we should ask our opponents if it's OK to take moves back.

Genius.

[David Sedgwick]

Do the Board or its members have votes at Council?

Board members each have a vote as do the immediate past President and the immediate past Chief Executive - at least that's what the Articles of Association say. However, when CJ resigned before the 2012 AGM, the Governance Committee determined that although he was the immediate past President, CJ didn't have a vote - it went to the President before, IIRC.
See here for voting entitlements at the 2013 AGM: http://www.englishchess.org.uk/wp-conte ... -8-Oct.pdf

What you say is true, but I'm not at all sure that that decision should be taken as a precedent. I'm far from convinced that the decision was correct.

[Roger de Coverly]

What you say is true, but I'm not at all sure that that decision should be taken as a precedent. I'm far from convinced that the decision was correct.

Which is an issue for the next meeting as well. Does AP have a vote and if so, why should that remove Roger Edwards from attending and voting in a capacity as Ex-President?

[JustinHorton]

Or indeed CJ de Mooi.

[Sean Hewitt]

Take Sean as an example. His (singular) board vote may well support the motion, but his (multiple) e2e4 votes may well go against, especially if he receives a lot of messages lobbying to that effect.

So in effect they'd be lobbying him to vote against his personal commitment? That rocks.

I am the representative member for e2e4, but also for Stockport League, Coventry League and Leicestershire County Association. I always seek their respective instructions on how to vote, and as a result it is not at all uncommon for me to cast votes both for and against a given motion.

[JustinHorton]

Fantastic. Do you abstain as well?

[Sean Hewitt]

Fantastic. Do you abstain as well?

I certainly have done in the past.

For example, there was a rule change proposed last year regarding the County Championships. I voted one way with the Leicestershire vote, the opposite way with both Stockport and Coventry leagues and I abstained with the e2e4 votes as I felt that the County Championships had nothing to do with a series of congresses.