Think not what the ECF can do for you, but what you can do for the ECF

Debate directly related to English Chess Federation matters.
NickFaulks
Posts: 5046
Joined: Sat Jan 02, 2010 1:28 pm

Re: Think not what the ECF can do for you, but what you can do for the ECF

Post by NickFaulks » Thu May 02, 2019 1:04 pm

J T Melsom wrote:
Thu May 02, 2019 12:45 pm
It would take far less effort for Nick Faulks to put his hand up to his original failing
I doubt that I behaved in the way you describe, but you evidently remember something which I don't so feel free to remind us.

J T Melsom
Posts: 559
Joined: Wed Aug 12, 2009 11:12 pm

Re: Think not what the ECF can do for you, but what you can do for the ECF

Post by J T Melsom » Thu May 02, 2019 1:14 pm

I reminded you once before and you told me I was being 'boring' so you are fully aware of the relevant posts. I would not have raised the matter again -- its a relatively minor matter in the course of debate - had I not regarded your recent post as such a ridiculous piece of hypocrisy. Your subsequent posts reveal more of your true colours and I'm afraid don't have much to do with civil discourse.

Roger de Coverly
Posts: 18057
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 2:51 pm

Re: Think not what the ECF can do for you, but what you can do for the ECF

Post by Roger de Coverly » Thu May 02, 2019 3:32 pm

Hok Yin Stephen Chiu wrote:
Thu May 02, 2019 12:42 pm

Obviously there is overlap, but something we've found is that ECF membership puts off unsure members from competitive chess, in that we can not guarantee enough games to make it a worthwhile commitment, and when we suggest local congresses, they are unsure about being able to make.
Would you support a system, where like the world of Bridge, the amount paid directly or indirectly to support the ECF was in direct proportion to how much you played?

David Robertson
Posts: 2144
Joined: Tue Apr 03, 2007 6:24 pm
Contact:

Re: Think not what the ECF can do for you, but what you can do for the ECF

Post by David Robertson » Thu May 02, 2019 4:42 pm

Roger de Coverly wrote:
Thu May 02, 2019 3:32 pm
Would you support a system, where like the world of Bridge, the amount paid directly or indirectly to support the ECF was in direct proportion to how much you played?
Humour him, for chrissake, Hok, and just say Yes

Nick Grey
Posts: 1148
Joined: Thu Dec 01, 2011 12:16 am

Re: Think not what the ECF can do for you, but what you can do for the ECF

Post by Nick Grey » Thu May 02, 2019 7:03 pm

yes - that means you pay ECF more than me directly - but I have mentioned that before.

Andrew Zigmond
Posts: 1704
Joined: Tue Nov 22, 2011 9:23 pm
Location: Harrogate

Re: Think not what the ECF can do for you, but what you can do for the ECF

Post by Andrew Zigmond » Fri May 03, 2019 1:47 pm

Nick Grey wrote:
Wed May 01, 2019 11:57 pm
angus -Roger Emerson’s report to Gold members which is grossly misleading.

I disagree with you on this matter. it was joint up, well thought out asked for comments before on voting intentions. so what more could I want.

it seems there is too much I in team ECF - we volunteer in all sorts of ways for English chess.
I was reluctant to mention the Gold members report as I know Roger Emerson has no wish to get involved with this forum. However it is only `grossly misleading` in that it gives a very different account of the ECF board's responses than Angus French would have us believe.
Controller - Yorkshire League
Chairman - Harrogate Chess Club
All views expressed entirely my own

Andrew Zigmond
Posts: 1704
Joined: Tue Nov 22, 2011 9:23 pm
Location: Harrogate

Re: Think not what the ECF can do for you, but what you can do for the ECF

Post by Andrew Zigmond » Fri May 03, 2019 1:54 pm

Angus French wrote:
Wed May 01, 2019 5:50 pm

What Malcolm did not provide was the split in expenditure between the Open and Women’s teams and a breakdown of the “fees” figure to show, in particular, the total amount spent on appearance fees. Malcolm was asked for this information at the meeting and he was asked for it quite a few times before the meeting. Relevant here is Roger Emerson’s report to Gold members which is grossly misleading.
But why should be provide this information? I thought the question here was whether the spending in international chess was excessive and if so how it should be capped. If Council are broadly happy with the current spend Malcolm should be allowed to get on with the job. I don't see why he should be obliged to give every little detail for people to pick over.

EDIT - I'm probably going to get accountability thrown back at me. If there is a question about what information should be in the public domain and what is confidential I would consider that a matter for the governance committee.
Controller - Yorkshire League
Chairman - Harrogate Chess Club
All views expressed entirely my own

Paul Cooksey
Posts: 424
Joined: Fri Oct 21, 2016 4:15 pm

Re: Think not what the ECF can do for you, but what you can do for the ECF

Post by Paul Cooksey » Fri May 03, 2019 2:13 pm

Andrew Zigmond wrote:
Fri May 03, 2019 1:54 pm
But why should be provide this information?
I think this misses the point. He can provide it or not. But IMO he should not criticise Angus for asking for it, or say that he has provided it if he has not.

Perhaps worth making the point that I agreed with Malcolm on the substance of the issue and voted with the board on this motion. But as Voltaire's biographer didn't say, while I might not agree with Angus I will defend to the death his right to represent his constituency.

Roger's too for the record. I think his report is biased, in the sense he fully supports the board strategy. In the same way my (thankfully less public) reports are biased because I do not. It would only be an issue if we misleading people about our positions.

Angus French
Posts: 1589
Joined: Thu May 15, 2008 1:37 am
Contact:

Re: Think not what the ECF can do for you, but what you can do for the ECF

Post by Angus French » Fri May 03, 2019 2:22 pm

Andrew Zigmond wrote:
Fri May 03, 2019 1:47 pm
Nick Grey wrote:
Wed May 01, 2019 11:57 pm
angus -Roger Emerson’s report to Gold members which is grossly misleading.

I disagree with you on this matter. it was joint up, well thought out asked for comments before on voting intentions. so what more could I want.

it seems there is too much I in team ECF - we volunteer in all sorts of ways for English chess.
I was reluctant to mention the Gold members report as I know Roger Emerson has no wish to get involved with this forum. However it is only `grossly misleading` in that it gives a very different account of the ECF board's responses than Angus French would have us believe.
I'm quite happy to stick to my description of Roger's report as "grossly misleading". You'll need to wait a few days before I comment further (assuming you want to read what I write).
Last edited by Angus French on Fri May 03, 2019 2:42 pm, edited 4 times in total.

User avatar
JustinHorton
Posts: 6347
Joined: Mon Aug 04, 2008 10:06 am
Location: Somewhere you're not

Re: Think not what the ECF can do for you, but what you can do for the ECF

Post by JustinHorton » Fri May 03, 2019 2:31 pm

Paul Cooksey wrote:
Fri May 03, 2019 2:13 pm


Roger's too for the record. I think his report is biased
However, there would be a problem if his report said something happened that did not in fact happen.
"Do you play chess?"
"Yes, but I prefer a game with a better chance of cheating."

lostontime.blogspot.com

Paul Cooksey
Posts: 424
Joined: Fri Oct 21, 2016 4:15 pm

Re: Think not what the ECF can do for you, but what you can do for the ECF

Post by Paul Cooksey » Fri May 03, 2019 2:37 pm

I would rather Justin had quoted the full sentence, I am making an effort to be less confrontational that I might otherwise. But anyway, I think I can guess the part of Roger's report Angus will take issue with, and would consider it selective reporting rather than factual inaccuracy. But I might be wrong.

Angus French
Posts: 1589
Joined: Thu May 15, 2008 1:37 am
Contact:

Re: Think not what the ECF can do for you, but what you can do for the ECF

Post by Angus French » Fri May 03, 2019 2:43 pm

Angus French wrote:
Fri May 03, 2019 2:22 pm
Andrew Zigmond wrote:
Fri May 03, 2019 1:47 pm
Nick Grey wrote:
Wed May 01, 2019 11:57 pm
angus -Roger Emerson’s report to Gold members which is grossly misleading.

I disagree with you on this matter. it was joint up, well thought out asked for comments before on voting intentions. so what more could I want.

it seems there is too much I in team ECF - we volunteer in all sorts of ways for English chess.
I was reluctant to mention the Gold members report as I know Roger Emerson has no wish to get involved with this forum. However it is only `grossly misleading` in that it gives a very different account of the ECF board's responses than Angus French would have us believe.
I'm quite happy to stick to my description of Roger's report as "grossly misleading". You'll need to wait a few days before I comment further (assuming you want to read what I write).
There is quite a lot I want to say about Roger's report and it'll to take me a bit of time to write-up my comments, in part since I have other things to do. But I'll give a few examples of the inaccuracies and misleading reporting:

- first sentence begins "Lorin D'Silva was unable to attend". It's not Lorin D'Silva, it's Lorin D'Costa. OK, maybe this is trivial but it's a bit slapdash in my opinion and it's the start of a litany of inaccuracies and biased reporting.
- later there's reference to Robert Richmond "attending his first Council meeting as a proxy for Francis Bowers, Platinum Members' Representative" who made a proposal "out of the blue". How's that going to be read? In fact Robert has attended many Council meetings and was previously a Finance Director of the ECF.
Last edited by Angus French on Fri May 03, 2019 3:11 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Angus French
Posts: 1589
Joined: Thu May 15, 2008 1:37 am
Contact:

Re: Think not what the ECF can do for you, but what you can do for the ECF

Post by Angus French » Fri May 03, 2019 3:00 pm

Paul Cooksey wrote:
Fri May 03, 2019 2:37 pm
I would rather Justin had quoted the full sentence, I am making an effort to be less confrontational that I might otherwise. But anyway, I think I can guess the part of Roger's report Angus will take issue with, and would consider it selective reporting rather than factual inaccuracy. But I might be wrong.
Well, the heading of the section of the report I'm most concerned about is inaccurate for a start. The proposal I and my fellow Bronze and Silver members' reps made was to cap the *contribution from ECF funds* towards international expenditure, not to cap the whole of international expenditure - the proposal wasn't to limit in any way what could be raised from sponsorship, donations and other outside sources. I was at pains to make this clear, especially at the meeting. Roger also misreported this in his consultation message to Gold members. You wonder, how many people will have misunderstood what the proposal was about?

Paul Buswell
Posts: 383
Joined: Sun Jul 06, 2008 4:56 pm

Re: Think not what the ECF can do for you, but what you can do for the ECF

Post by Paul Buswell » Fri May 03, 2019 6:10 pm

Brian Valentine wrote:
Wed May 01, 2019 5:19 pm

I'm not suggesting that the ECF starts paying volunteers.

But perhaps we should start considering that? To the most senior ECF volunteers....

Not a proper salary or anything near - that at the moment is financial cloud cuckoo land. But perhaps a reasonable honorarium as some recognition of the huge demands of being a senior ECF volunteer for little recognition other than brickbats and destructive criticism.

Such a concept would need very strict policing by utterly independent adjudicators with power to approve or withhold payment.

I think it's an idea worth looking into. And it might attract some new blood!

PB

Kevin Thurlow
Posts: 2932
Joined: Wed Apr 30, 2008 12:28 pm

Re: Think not what the ECF can do for you, but what you can do for the ECF

Post by Kevin Thurlow » Fri May 03, 2019 9:02 pm

"Roger also misreported this in his consultation message to Gold members. You wonder, how many people will have misunderstood what the proposal was about?"

I don't know, but I certainly wouldn't blindly believe what he says.

Post Reply