Tournament dispute from several years ago
-
- Posts: 5834
- Joined: Wed Apr 30, 2008 12:28 pm
Tournament dispute from several years ago
Post removed in protest at censorship by Forum managers.
The post was relevant to its former home, but obviously someone found it uncomfortable reading!
The post was relevant to its former home, but obviously someone found it uncomfortable reading!
Last edited by Kevin Thurlow on Mon Oct 03, 2011 10:40 am, edited 1 time in total.
"Kevin was the arbiter and was very patient. " Nick Grey
-
- Posts: 21318
- Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 2:51 pm
Re: Appeal for Board Support
Although not a long time by the standards of some other chess disputes, this was nearly twenty years ago.Kevin Thurlow wrote:"A sub-committee (comprising A McFarlane, D Welch and R Furness) was set up and many months later it produced a report, saying the arbiter had done nothing wrong.
There's a report about the sub-committee report, which may or may not be considered reliable at
http://www.sccu.ndo.co.uk/Bulletin1994-5.docx
The initial dispute may have been over whether a player has the right to talk to a group of friends between moves. I would say not because of the danger of electronic assistance (not an issue in 1994), and I would hope an arbiter would uphold this.
Any additional discussion on this is best moved to chess history.
-
- Posts: 258
- Joined: Thu Nov 06, 2008 10:29 am
- Location: London
Re: Appeal for Board Support
I'm still awaiting an apology from A McFarlane and co but chess history demonstrates the likeihood being very remote.
Louise
Louise
You might very well think that ; I couldn't possibly comment.
' you turn if you want. The lady's not for turning'
' you turn if you want. The lady's not for turning'
-
- Posts: 5834
- Joined: Wed Apr 30, 2008 12:28 pm
Re: Appeal for Board Support
"Rogers is correct. That one is not really needed in this thread"
I was merely pointing out the inconsistency in approach - as you very well know. I have no intention in going over the previous dispute again.
Roger - moves were being discussed...
I was merely pointing out the inconsistency in approach - as you very well know. I have no intention in going over the previous dispute again.
Roger - moves were being discussed...
"Kevin was the arbiter and was very patient. " Nick Grey
-
- Posts: 147
- Joined: Sat Nov 07, 2009 12:20 pm
Re: Appeal for Board Support
I'm still awaiting the minutes and a decision concerning the 25th November 2009 North Circular Chess League appeal ( at which you were an appeal committee member ) concerning points deducted from Enfield chess club after secret evidence was given to the secretary.Louise Sinclair wrote:I'm still awaiting an apology from A McFarlane and co......
Louise Sinclair wrote:...... but chess history demonstrates the likeihood being very remote.
Louise
-
- Posts: 258
- Joined: Thu Nov 06, 2008 10:29 am
- Location: London
Re: Tournament dispute from several years ago
Secret evidence? I shal refer this to my husband the NCCL Secretary as I know of no "secret evidence" and you did not attend the comitee meeting despite being invited although other members of your club were in attendence ......
You might very well think that ; I couldn't possibly comment.
' you turn if you want. The lady's not for turning'
' you turn if you want. The lady's not for turning'
-
- Posts: 6028
- Joined: Fri Dec 08, 2006 8:05 pm
- Location: Evesham
Re: Tournament dispute from several years ago
There was no censorship just a move into it's own thread since as you say a little further down the two are unrelated, you were also referring to someone who is sadly no longer with us and I felt uncomfortable with that element of your postKevin Thurlow wrote:Post removed in protest at censorship by Forum managers.
The post was relevant to its former home, but obviously someone found it uncomfortable reading!
Your original post was left intact though
Last edited by Carl Hibbard on Tue Oct 04, 2011 7:15 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Reason: I not we
Reason: I not we
Cheers
Carl Hibbard
Carl Hibbard
-
- Posts: 1758
- Joined: Sat Aug 02, 2008 8:52 pm
Re: Tournament dispute from several years ago
For clarification - I made no protest. I do agree that it is better placed in its own thread.
-
- Posts: 5834
- Joined: Wed Apr 30, 2008 12:28 pm
Re: Tournament dispute from several years ago
"There was no censorship just a move into it's own thread since as you say a little further down the two are unrelated, you were also referring to someone who is sadly no longer with us and we felt uncomfortable with that element of your post"
Really?
I made no derogatory comments about any deceased person and your insinuation that I did so is intolerable. It is an immediate requirement that you apologise for your false accusation and/or delete it.
Really?
I made no derogatory comments about any deceased person and your insinuation that I did so is intolerable. It is an immediate requirement that you apologise for your false accusation and/or delete it.
"Kevin was the arbiter and was very patient. " Nick Grey
-
- Posts: 147
- Joined: Sat Nov 07, 2009 12:20 pm
Re: Tournament dispute from several years ago
I made an unwarranted assumption in referring to "secret evidence" : I cannot recall any indications apart from your husband the NCCL Secretary's references to it that such evidence exists.Louise Sinclair wrote:Secret evidence? I shal refer this to my husband the NCCL Secretary as I know of no "secret evidence" .......
I should have said that your husband the NCCL Secretary stated that Barking had made some sort of complaint concerning an incident where a mobile phone or other device, possibly one of those phones possessed by Barking and Enfield match players, may have made a sound.
Your husband the NCCL Secretary in many of his statements referred to information which he apparently obtained in writing or in conversation with persons who witnessed or heard about this. (My understanding is that the NCCL considers hearsay evidence valid.)
However, statements by your husband the NCCL Secretary describing what he ( I assumed until today ) believed to be evidence combined with a refusal to produce any of that evidence is not generally regarded as proof that evidence exists.
Therefor, if your husband the NCCL Secretary clarifies this matter by stating publicly that the evidence to which he referred does not exist, I will withdraw my reference to "secret evidence" with an appropriate apology.
Of course, this is irrelevant to that long ago final appeal, as until today no official of the NCCL has claimed this evidence did not exist.
As Enfield has never been provided with any evidence against it, I felt that attending the appeal was pointless.Louise Sinclair wrote:and you did not attend the comitee meeting despite being invited although other members of your club were in attendence ......
The fact that much of Enfield's defense was based on the assumption that the evidence to which your husband referred actually existed and also that the appeal committee's final decision is taking years rather than days confirms the correctness of that decision.
-
- Posts: 21318
- Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 2:51 pm
Re: Tournament dispute from several years ago
He who must not be criticised or mocked is weighing in.
http://stevegiddinschessblog.wordpress.com/
http://stevegiddinschessblog.wordpress.com/
-
- Posts: 1071
- Joined: Sat Apr 14, 2007 3:16 pm
- Location: Sutton Coldfield
Re: Tournament dispute from several years ago
The irony of someone who allows no comment on his blog posts complaining about a 'Censor-in-Chief' is surely not lost upon the denizens of the termite colony.Roger de Coverly wrote:He who must not be criticised or mocked is weighing in.
http://stevegiddinschessblog.wordpress.com/
Ian Kingston
http://www.iankingston.com
http://www.iankingston.com
-
- Posts: 6028
- Joined: Fri Dec 08, 2006 8:05 pm
- Location: Evesham
Re: Tournament dispute from several years ago
Please just read again what I posted Kevin as I never suggested anything of the kind, I said I was uncomfortable with the raising of an old disputeKevin Thurlow wrote:I made no derogatory comments about any deceased person and your insinuation that I did so is intolerable. It is an immediate requirement that you apologise for your false accusation and/or delete it.
I am stepping back and asking Jack and Sean for their comments on the matter and am happy to be moderated myself if that is the case
Cheers
Carl Hibbard
Carl Hibbard
-
- Posts: 6028
- Joined: Fri Dec 08, 2006 8:05 pm
- Location: Evesham
Re: Tournament dispute from several years ago
It's a shame but at least we do allow comments Mr. GiddinsIan Kingston wrote:The irony of someone who allows no comment on his blog posts complaining about a 'Censor-in-Chief' is surely not lost upon the denizens of the termite colony.
Cheers
Carl Hibbard
Carl Hibbard
-
- Posts: 6028
- Joined: Fri Dec 08, 2006 8:05 pm
- Location: Evesham
Re: Tournament dispute from several years ago
Since I am the 'Devil' according to Steve Giddins should I be allowed to post a reply with no comments permitted
Cheers
Carl Hibbard
Carl Hibbard