Update from Shallow Throat

[NickFaulks]

Is it too much to ask for the current board to be allowed to do their jobs

I take it that's a rhetorical question.

[Roger de Coverly]

Malcolm Pein was declared to have lost but the next day he was declared to have won after all.
...
Bob Kane definitely did lose, but it may be decided that me must continue in post so he may return.

Two of the defeated directors return as managers.
http://www.englishchess.org.uk/board-st ... h-the-ecf/

[JustinHorton]

Just to follow up on this post; I was under the impression that John Upham was the editor of BCM.

I wasn't, but I am under the impression that he might be "BCM" at the other place. Is this correct?

[John Upham]

Two of the defeated directors return as managers.
http://www.englishchess.org.uk/board-st ... h-the-ecf/

Excellent: another wrong has been righted.

[John Upham]

Just to follow up on this post; I was under the impression that John Upham was the editor of BCM.

I wasn't, but I am under the impression that he might be "BCM" at the other place. Is this correct?

Theoretically it could be used be myself, James or the two owners. Practically, it would be myself as the two owners do not post on any forums.

[JustinHorton]

Are they supposed to have anonymous registrations over there?

[JustinHorton]

Maybe we could ask Chris Fegan, who I understand is going to be brought back as Manager for Forum Development and Working Relationships.

[JustinHorton]

Two of the defeated directors return as managers.
http://www.englishchess.org.uk/board-st ... h-the-ecf/

Excellent: another election result I didn't like has been righted.

Just, ah, righted that one.

[NickFaulks]

Two of the defeated directors return as managers.

Does this mean that David will represent Malcolm at board meetings? It would now look odd if anyone else did.

[Michael Farthing]

The case of the BCM registration was raised at the time on the other forum and a moderator (Kay, I believe), stated that she had made the decision that BCM was a well known chess organisation so the principle that the identity of posters was known was not breached. She was a littlke ambivalent about the decision as I recall. At the time I think the general expectation was that the id would be used for specific BCM posts, such as the regular monthly posting of contents.

It would seem, however, that in reality it is a John Upham post, more often than not reflecting his posts here. Perhaps John might consider whether asking the moderators to change his login id might be a sensible idea?

[John Upham]

The case of the BCM registration was raised at the time on the other forum and a moderator (Kay, I believe), stated that she had made the decision that BCM was a well known chess organisation so the principle that the identity of posters was known was not breached. She was a littlke ambivalent about the decision as I recall. At the time I think the general expectation was that the id would be used for specific BCM posts, such as the regular monthly posting of contents.

It would seem, however, that in reality it is a John Upham post, more often than not reflecting his posts here. Perhaps John might consider whether asking the moderators to change his login id might be a sensible idea?

I will request a personal ID and use BCM for "official business" only.

[David Pardoe]

I don't see the need for that...
All John needs to do is to put a footnote, which appears after all his messages, saying that any views expressed are his own, and not those of the BCM..
A little bit of self promotion of chess related materials is entirely sensible..
The one thing we don't do enough of in UK chess is to promote ourselves..

[Carl Hibbard]

Just to follow up on this post; I was under the impression that John Upham was the editor of BCM.

I wasn't, but I am under the impression that he might be "BCM" at the other place. Is this correct?

Theoretically it could be used be myself, James or the two owners. Practically, it would be myself as the two owners do not post on any forums.

I didn't allow John to register as that here.

[Jonathan Bryant]

I didn't allow John to register as that here.

For obvious reasons.

The BCM registration is something that is both completely trivial and a clear demonstrated that the ECF Forum wasn’t/isn’t being run properly.

[JustinHorton]

Or, indeed, sensibly.