I am hoping to obtain something more definitive that Malcolm's best guess.Julie Denning wrote: ↑Sat Jun 30, 2018 8:04 pmI agree entirely with your reading of the wording, which implies that for the second vote to be any different to the first, some delegates will have had to switch their votes. This is why I discussed it with Malcolm, who gave me his understanding, as I reported previously, that the lowest scoring candidate in any vote dropped out for the next vote - but I agree that this is not obvious from the wording of the Regulation.
Which Candidate Should the ECF Support in the FIDE Presidential Election? (Take 2)
-
- Posts: 8472
- Joined: Sat Jan 02, 2010 1:28 pm
Re: Which Candidate Should the ECF Support in the FIDE Presidential Election? (Take 2)
If you want a picture of the future, imagine a QR code stamped on a human face — forever.
-
- Posts: 4662
- Joined: Tue Nov 18, 2008 9:26 pm
Re: Which Candidate Should the ECF Support in the FIDE Presidential Election? (Take 2)
It seems to me that the rules are reasonably clear that the contest is simply rerun if none of the three candidates have more than 50%. The only reason why we are used to the third candidate dropping out is that we are accustomed to expect the winner necessarily to have more than 50%, but it is quite possible to keep all three candidates if the winner can then simply have the most votes of all three.
Why rerun it in that case, you might ask? Perhaps it would all be much closer than expected, and some delegates might switch when they see the first round results. Perhaps the third candidate, previously a rank outsider, might have finished so close to the other two that there would be a switch towards him in the second round, especially if some supporters for the top two candidates were always half hearted, might think their candidate has peaked and would rather switch to the outsider, the candidate with momentum, than see their hitherto main rival win.
Unusual, perhaps, but at any event, surely not as ridiculous as some seem to think.
Why rerun it in that case, you might ask? Perhaps it would all be much closer than expected, and some delegates might switch when they see the first round results. Perhaps the third candidate, previously a rank outsider, might have finished so close to the other two that there would be a switch towards him in the second round, especially if some supporters for the top two candidates were always half hearted, might think their candidate has peaked and would rather switch to the outsider, the candidate with momentum, than see their hitherto main rival win.
Unusual, perhaps, but at any event, surely not as ridiculous as some seem to think.
-
- Posts: 21321
- Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 2:51 pm
Re: Which Candidate Should the ECF Support in the FIDE Presidential Election? (Take 2)
I suppose the voters are also being asked to confirm they wish a President to be elected by a minority of the electorate.
-
- Posts: 8472
- Joined: Sat Jan 02, 2010 1:28 pm
Re: Which Candidate Should the ECF Support in the FIDE Presidential Election? (Take 2)
The question is whether this interpretation, if correct, is what was intended. If it isn't, then a lot of top-priced legal hours were wasted.Jonathan Rogers wrote: ↑Sat Jun 30, 2018 8:25 pmUnusual, perhaps, but at any event, surely not as ridiculous as some seem to think.
If you want a picture of the future, imagine a QR code stamped on a human face — forever.
-
- Posts: 8472
- Joined: Sat Jan 02, 2010 1:28 pm
Re: Which Candidate Should the ECF Support in the FIDE Presidential Election? (Take 2)
He could only offer the post of Deputy President to one person, so there wasn't much to be done.David Sedgwick wrote: ↑Sat Jun 30, 2018 8:20 pmIt looks as though Makropoulos may have lost the support of both France and Poland in one day.
If you want a picture of the future, imagine a QR code stamped on a human face — forever.
-
- Posts: 78
- Joined: Mon Oct 18, 2010 3:41 am
Re: Which Candidate Should the ECF Support in the FIDE Presidential Election? (Take 2)
re my comments about Tromso on the previous thread.
In terms of organisation and meeting management, the Election for President may well have been the high point, even if that point wasn't very high (having three different people running the meeting at the same time was a significant issue). The other elections (for Ethics, Verification etc) ran on for far too long, and the whole thing ended in farce as Jorge Vega instructed the Americas delegates (sans US and a few others) to stay away on the final day, so that there wasn't a quorum and important changes to the Laws of Chess etc weren't formally passed.
The whole purpose of the GA in 2014 was to make absolutely sure that Kirsan Ilyumzhinov was elected to run FIDE for the next 4 years, and having expended a considerable amount of energy to do that, the FIDE executive lost interest in the rest of the proceedings. If such an attitude is repeated in 2018 then I can only see chaos.
On the the matter of electoral regulations, I agree with the interpretation that if a second ballot is required, all candidates are still in the running, but they just need the most number of votes (a plurality rather than a majority). In private discussions I've had with one of the tickets, the question of who to vote for on the second ballot has already come up.
In terms of organisation and meeting management, the Election for President may well have been the high point, even if that point wasn't very high (having three different people running the meeting at the same time was a significant issue). The other elections (for Ethics, Verification etc) ran on for far too long, and the whole thing ended in farce as Jorge Vega instructed the Americas delegates (sans US and a few others) to stay away on the final day, so that there wasn't a quorum and important changes to the Laws of Chess etc weren't formally passed.
The whole purpose of the GA in 2014 was to make absolutely sure that Kirsan Ilyumzhinov was elected to run FIDE for the next 4 years, and having expended a considerable amount of energy to do that, the FIDE executive lost interest in the rest of the proceedings. If such an attitude is repeated in 2018 then I can only see chaos.
On the the matter of electoral regulations, I agree with the interpretation that if a second ballot is required, all candidates are still in the running, but they just need the most number of votes (a plurality rather than a majority). In private discussions I've had with one of the tickets, the question of who to vote for on the second ballot has already come up.
-
- Posts: 232
- Joined: Sun Jul 05, 2015 4:59 pm
Re: Which Candidate Should the ECF Support in the FIDE Presidential Election? (Take 2)
After Malcolm Pein's excellent piece in Chess, I think the ECF should:
(i) most importantly, somehow welcome Russia withdrawing support from Kirsan, long overdue
(ii) indicate that the ECF will probably support a loser.
(i) most importantly, somehow welcome Russia withdrawing support from Kirsan, long overdue
(ii) indicate that the ECF will probably support a loser.
-
- Posts: 4662
- Joined: Tue Nov 18, 2008 9:26 pm
Re: Which Candidate Should the ECF Support in the FIDE Presidential Election? (Take 2)
Well, the interpretation accords with the actual words, which are not themselves ambiguous and do not lead to obviously absurd results. One would normally look at the intention of the legislator only if the words were ambiguous or the results absurd. For discerning the "true intention" is often far from straightforward, since you need to look not only at the intention of the drafters of the rules but also of those who passed them. Untangling the present rules because something different was intended would seem to be an astonishing thing to do in the heated context of rules for deciding the Presidency - not that I would necessarily bet against it happening anyway.NickFaulks wrote: ↑Sat Jun 30, 2018 9:24 pmThe question is whether this interpretation, if correct, is what was intended. If it isn't, then a lot of top-priced legal hours were wasted.Jonathan Rogers wrote: ↑Sat Jun 30, 2018 8:25 pmUnusual, perhaps, but at any event, surely not as ridiculous as some seem to think.
-
- Posts: 8472
- Joined: Sat Jan 02, 2010 1:28 pm
Re: Which Candidate Should the ECF Support in the FIDE Presidential Election? (Take 2)
If I had wished to suggest that I would have done so. I was merely making the point I made.Jonathan Rogers wrote: ↑Sun Jul 01, 2018 12:20 pmUntangling the present rules because something different was intended would seem to be an astonishing thing to do
In any case, from what Shaun has told us it is likely that there would be tactical voting in the event that the first round was not conclusive.
If you want a picture of the future, imagine a QR code stamped on a human face — forever.
-
- Posts: 2323
- Joined: Sat Oct 23, 2010 8:46 pm
- Location: Dublin, Ireland
Re: Which Candidate Should the ECF Support in the FIDE Presidential Election? (Take 2)
I have voted for Nigel now. I have nothing against Malcolm but not so keen on Makropolous.NickFaulks wrote: ↑Sat Jun 30, 2018 2:22 pmHe has done that.Tim Harding wrote: ↑Sat Jun 30, 2018 1:19 pmCome on Nigel; beef up your team while there is still time.
https://twitter.com/nigelshortchess
...
Tim Harding
Historian and FIDE Arbiter
Author of 'Steinitz in London,' British Chess Literature to 1914', 'Joseph Henry Blackburne: A Chess Biography', and 'Eminent Victorian Chess Players'
http://www.chessmail.com
Historian and FIDE Arbiter
Author of 'Steinitz in London,' British Chess Literature to 1914', 'Joseph Henry Blackburne: A Chess Biography', and 'Eminent Victorian Chess Players'
http://www.chessmail.com
Re: Which Candidate Should the ECF Support in the FIDE Presidential Election? (Take 2)
ECF has nominated Nigel Short for FIDE President. Joined by USA, NZ, Nigeria, Poland & Finland
https://twitter.com/nigelshortchess
https://twitter.com/nigelshortchess
-
- Posts: 10364
- Joined: Mon Aug 04, 2008 10:06 am
- Location: Somewhere you're not
Re: Which Candidate Should the ECF Support in the FIDE Presidential Election? (Take 2)
Well I'm pleased to see we're following through on our commitment to women in chess
"Do you play chess?"
"Yes, but I prefer a game with a better chance of cheating."
lostontime.blogspot.com
"Yes, but I prefer a game with a better chance of cheating."
lostontime.blogspot.com
-
- Posts: 2153
- Joined: Thu May 15, 2008 1:37 am
Re: Which Candidate Should the ECF Support in the FIDE Presidential Election? (Take 2)
FIDE has published details of the submitted Presidential tickets.
Dvorkovich's ticket is nominated by 13 Federations, Nigel's by 6 and Makro's by... 64.
There are also details of the candidates for the Continental Presidential elections. One candidate - for the Asia continent - is Ignatius Leong though there are some issues with his candidacy.
Dvorkovich's ticket is nominated by 13 Federations, Nigel's by 6 and Makro's by... 64.
There are also details of the candidates for the Continental Presidential elections. One candidate - for the Asia continent - is Ignatius Leong though there are some issues with his candidacy.
-
- Posts: 21321
- Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 2:51 pm
Re: Which Candidate Should the ECF Support in the FIDE Presidential Election? (Take 2)
Zurab unopposed for Europe. Is Malcolm on that slate as well?Angus French wrote: ↑Wed Jul 04, 2018 12:01 pmThere are also details of the candidates for the Continental Presidential elections.
-
- Posts: 5249
- Joined: Mon Apr 09, 2007 5:56 pm
- Location: Croydon
Re: Which Candidate Should the ECF Support in the FIDE Presidential Election? (Take 2)
No. That is not allowed, so he dropped out when he linked up with Makropoulos.Roger de Coverly wrote: ↑Wed Jul 04, 2018 12:18 pmZurab unopposed for Europe. Is Malcolm on that slate as well?
See http://www.europechess.org/ecu-circular ... -no-22018/ for Azmaiparashvili's ticket.