My Resignation

[Jonathan Rogers]

For the record, Shropshire has a lot to thank CJ for. He masterminded the Nigel short simul tour and we ran a very successful event which helped to lay the foundations for the subsequent rescue of the Shropshire congress since it gave us access to a super venue and energised the local organisers. As to the finances, we were quoted a fee for the simul which we agreed, and I don't think we have any interest in what happened to the money thereafter. No-one batted an eyelid at the board fee and we surpassed the original target number of boards and we also made a profit out of the event which has gone into the county's funds.

No one denies that he has done some good. He was once a very popular President. Oh, those happy days when he used to post here ...

But most of us have moved on. He is not immune from challenge on the basis of past good deeds.

You wrote earlier that all the fuss was probaby caused by some managerial cock-up rather than anything else. I posted in rely a list of reasons to at least worry about the possibility of something more and the need for further information. Did you have anything to say in reply?

[Bill Porter]

David,
We have a lame duck ECF President. One who, if he has any sense, will be avoiding certain chess events for fear of the adverse reception he might get. I would hope no one would actually boo him but that has been suggested. Walking out or simply ignoring him seem much more likely courses of action. But it is unbelievable that we are talking this way only 6 months after what was a magnificent event.

Who is this "we" you talk about? This thread may have gone on for pages and pages, but it's a relatively small number of forumites who are participating, let alone the wider chess public. I don't see that you have any evidence for your assertion about lame ducks. That may be your opinion, stated and restated countless times on this forum, but that doesn't mean that you speak for others. It is extraordinarily arrogant to suggest that you do. And is it not rather bizarre that an arbiter would want to incite people to behave in such a way?

Steve: who is this 'we' you represent?
Is it people like myself who no longer have any involvement in chess organisation after discovering there is no redress for ( presumably ) false accusations?
(Despite a statement by the NCCL Secretary that he had invented the complaint and evidence, the penalty for a mobile phone ringing still stands against my team.)
Occasional posts like this are now my only involvement in chess organisational matters.

Alex has not yet succeeded even this far concerning far more serious allegations.
CJ's continuing silence suggests he is still hopeful that your implied view that anyone who doesn't post on this forum supports him will prevail.
He may also have learned from history. Milhous wasn't impeached for the Watergate breakin but for lying about it.

I find the comparison elsewhere between Steve Davis and CJ interesting.
I doubt I'd even now know CJ was president if not for the publicity concerning Tshirtgate.
Complaints of apathy and reluctance to vote are typical of governments and other organisations like the ECF which desire the appearance of democracy while avoiding the reality.
Individuals who have made commitments still have to work with CJ, but 'apathy' seems a sensible approach for anyone else.

For the record, Shropshire has a lot to thank CJ for.

He is not immune from challenge on the basis of past good deeds.

Indeed

[Paul Cooksey]

Just playing devil's advocate for a moment, could CJ's supporters and apologists possibly explain exactly what Lara has done wrong, apart from raising a legitimite concern about whether the T shirt was appropriate (and I'm sure she would happily concede there were arguments for and against). Could they also explain why, instead of politely begging to differ, CJ decided to take his grievance to the press - thus ensuring that Lara's `punishment` outweighed any `crime`.

I explained at length in Open Letter thread why I disagreed with this analysis. It seemed redundant to post it again, since no new facts have been added. I don't believe a "crime" occurred, I believe it was an "accident" because of a misunderstanding. Lara seems to have suffered as a result, as has CJ, probably to a lesser extent. Life is not fair, people do suffer disproportionately to their actions.

Generally I stand by what I have said about this incident before, except where I have been corrected on factual points. The one thing I regret saying was right at the beginning. I thought David Welch, as congress manager, was the was the person responsible for ensuring misunderstandings did not occur. In fact it seems now who had that responsibility was unclear. Stewart Reuben has been mocked relentlessly for saying he thinks he could have prevented the misunderstanding getting out of hand. But to my mind, it reflects well on his years of experience. Whether he is right or not, the congress manager should believe that he has both the authority and the accountability for such things. If we need to change how the British is run, so the congress manager is truly in charge, I think we should.

I am reluctant to talk about the financial matters in relation to t-shirtgate since I don't believe CJ has refused to apologise because he is in Keene's pocket, as others seem to be implying. I believe it is because he has nothing further to apologise for.

Financial matters are important of course, if CJ has done anything illegal or immoral then I would consider it, at the least, a resigning matter. But if the point is he took full credit for arranging Darwin's sponsorship, when in fact he should only have taken partial credit, I do not consider that a charge of the utmost seriousness. There does not seem to be any dishonesty on his part.

I am uncomfortable with how Alex is arguing his case. His campaign for public support, based on unclear and unrevealed facts, has damaged the ECF. If he has evidence of wrong doing I think he should present it either to the board, or if he has lost confidence in the board, an EGM.

[JustinHorton]

Thus spake Ray

[JustinHorton]

Financial matters are important of course, if CJ has done anything illegal or immoral then I would consider it, at the least, a resigning matter. But if the point is he took full credit for arranging Darwin's sponsorship, when in fact he should only have taken partial credit, I do not consider that a charge of the utmost seriousness. There does not seem to be any dishonesty on his part.

Well, one point is that he claimed to have shelled out personally to support the Championships, but that claim has come under challenge. Another is that the way the financial support was organised and distributed - under his control - seem to have been neither transparent nor satisfactory.

[Sebastian Stone]

Question.

How much longer is this insane farce going to continue?

[Alex McFarlane]

Steve Rooney,

Apolgies for the delay in replying but I was running a chess event.

You are entitled to your view as I am to mine.

For clarification if it were needed. Lara and I have prevented protests of one sort or another. I certainly was not advocating any such action.

I really don't consider asking De Mooi to actually tell us what he did say is such a terrible request. His actions have had such a devastating effect on Lara and to a lesser extent on me. I think we are worth an explanation. Obviously others on here agree as do many who have pm'd and emailed one or other of us.

Without that support we would have given up long ago.

The ECF Board has refused to even consider mediation. Why? The answer given was poor. Even if the Board thought no agreement was possible, shouldn't it at least have tried? Why are they so afraid to talk about it?

If you can explain either of those questions or De Mooi's reasons for not denying that he did accuse us of homophobia then please let me know. I would be grateful.

[Paul Cooksey]

Well, one point is that he claimed to have shelled out personally to support the Championships, but that claim has come under challenge. Another is that the way the financial support was organised and distributed - under his control - seem to have been neither transparent nor satisfactory.

Agreed, but I see this as evidence of inadequate governance processes rather than wrong doing on CJs part.

[Jonathan Bryant]

Question.

How much longer is this insane farce going to continue?

Well the Keene-Miles affair is well over 21 years old and counting so this youngster has some way to run yet. Of course, the K-M thing not being satisfactorily resolved at the time is partly why we're he now with the CJ stuff.

[JustinHorton]

Agreed, but I see this as evidence of inadequate governance processes rather than wrong doing on CJ's part.

Well, making that judgement seems to me to depend on our obtaining information which we don't presently have. Which is, of course, in part a problem of inadequate governance.

(I meant to write a blog post entitled On Good Governance some time back. Never got round to it. Or not yet, anyway....)

[Paul Cooksey]

Agreed, but I see this as evidence of inadequate governance processes rather than wrong doing on CJ's part.

Well, making that judgement seems to me to depend on our obtaining information which we don't presently have. Which is, of course, in part a problem of inadequate governance.

I'm trying to be really precise, in that the evidence we have is that there was inadequate governance. There is no evidence of anything else, good or bad, at least in the public domain.

If you are inferring I don't think there was any wrong doing, that is fair. The invited GMs all seem to have maintained goods relations with CJ after the event. I find that persuasive. But better governance, so everything is definite, seems to be in everyone's interests.

[Andrew Zigmond]

Just playing devil's advocate for a moment, could CJ's supporters and apologists possibly explain exactly what Lara has done wrong, apart from raising a legitimite concern about whether the T shirt was appropriate (and I'm sure she would happily concede there were arguments for and against). Could they also explain why, instead of politely begging to differ, CJ decided to take his grievance to the press - thus ensuring that Lara's `punishment` outweighed any `crime`.

I explained at length in Open Letter thread why I disagreed with this analysis. It seemed redundant to post it again, since no new facts have been added. I don't believe a "crime" occurred, I believe it was an "accident" because of a misunderstanding. Lara seems to have suffered as a result, as has CJ, probably to a lesser extent. Life is not fair, people do suffer disproportionately to their actions.

I'm prepared to accept that it was an accident as well. All I (and a lot of others) am asking is for Raymond Keene to stop attacking Lara (and apologise for doing so) and for CJ to take the lead in drawing a line under this incident. Or if he wants Alex and Lara out, then to have the guts to say it to their face. At the end of the day he had the bravery to take a stand against homophobia (which I applaud), why he can't face a few twittering chessplayers?

[JustinHorton]

If you are inferring I don't think there was any wrong doing, that is fair. The invited GMs all seem to have maintained goods relations with CJ after the event. I find that persuasive.

I don't understand this at all. The problems (alleged, real or potential) don't relate to whether the invited GMs got paid.

All I (and a lot of others) am asking is for Raymond Keene to stop attacking Lara (and apologise for doing so)

You may have to wait a long time: I'm struggling to recall any occasion on which Ray has apologised to anybody.

[Andrew Zigmond]

Firstly I'm sorry about the message above where I mangled the quote and ended up reposting Paul Cooksey's comments as if they were mine.

I have twice asked Keene on twitter to specify exactly what Lara has done to deserve such persecution at his hands. He has twice failed to answer. As Mr Keene clearly reads this forum I will add that I am happy to correspond privately and will respect confidentiality within reason.

My main worry now is that Keene, de Mooi and their sycophants are going to hound Lara all the way to North Shields.

[Alex McFarlane]

Andrew,

If it is any reassurance, Mr De Mooi has not made an appearance at any event where I have officiated since this blew up. This may simply be co-incidence.

Of course, I may well not be at South Shields in any official capacity.