If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.
Policy / Politique
The fee for tournament organizers advertising on ChessTalk is $20/event or $100/yearly unlimited for the year.
Les frais d'inscription des organisateurs de tournoi sur ChessTalk sont de 20 $/événement ou de 100 $/année illimitée.
You can etransfer to Henry Lam at chesstalkforum at gmail dot com
Transfér à Henry Lam à chesstalkforum@gmail.com
Dark Knight / Le Chevalier Noir
General Guidelines
---- Nous avons besoin d'un traduction français!
Some Basics
1. Under Board "Frequently Asked Questions" (FAQs) there are 3 sections dealing with General Forum Usage, User Profile Features, and Reading and Posting Messages. These deal with everything from Avatars to Your Notifications. Most general technical questions are covered there. Here is a link to the FAQs. https://forum.chesstalk.com/help
2. Consider using the SEARCH button if you are looking for information. You may find your question has already been answered in a previous thread.
3. If you've looked for an answer to a question, and not found one, then you should consider asking your question in a new thread. For example, there have already been questions and discussion regarding: how to do chess diagrams (FENs); crosstables that line up properly; and the numerous little “glitches” that every new site will have.
4. Read pinned or sticky threads, like this one, if they look important. This applies especially to newcomers.
5. Read the thread you're posting in before you post. There are a variety of ways to look at a thread. These are covered under “Display Modes”.
6. Thread titles: please provide some details in your thread title. This is useful for a number of reasons. It helps ChessTalk members to quickly skim the threads. It prevents duplication of threads. And so on.
7. Unnecessary thread proliferation (e.g., deliberately creating a new thread that duplicates existing discussion) is discouraged. Look to see if a thread on your topic may have already been started and, if so, consider adding your contribution to the pre-existing thread. However, starting new threads to explore side-issues that are not relevant to the original subject is strongly encouraged. A single thread on the Canadian Open, with hundreds of posts on multiple sub-topics, is no better than a dozen threads on the Open covering only a few topics. Use your good judgment when starting a new thread.
8. If and/or when sub-forums are created, please make sure to create threads in the proper place.
Debate
9. Give an opinion and back it up with a reason. Throwaway comments such as "Game X pwnz because my friend and I think so!" could be considered pointless at best, and inflammatory at worst.
10. Try to give your own opinions, not simply those copied and pasted from reviews or opinions of your friends.
Unacceptable behavior and warnings
11. In registering here at ChessTalk please note that the same or similar rules apply here as applied at the previous Boardhost message board. In particular, the following content is not permitted to appear in any messages:
* Racism
* Hatred
* Harassment
* Adult content
* Obscene material
* Nudity or pornography
* Material that infringes intellectual property or other proprietary rights of any party
* Material the posting of which is tortious or violates a contractual or fiduciary obligation you or we owe to another party
* Piracy, hacking, viruses, worms, or warez
* Spam
* Any illegal content
* unapproved Commercial banner advertisements or revenue-generating links
* Any link to or any images from a site containing any material outlined in these restrictions
* Any material deemed offensive or inappropriate by the Board staff
12. Users are welcome to challenge other points of view and opinions, but should do so respectfully. Personal attacks on others will not be tolerated. Posts and threads with unacceptable content can be closed or deleted altogether. Furthermore, a range of sanctions are possible - from a simple warning to a temporary or even a permanent banning from ChessTalk.
Helping to Moderate
13. 'Report' links (an exclamation mark inside a triangle) can be found in many places throughout the board. These links allow users to alert the board staff to anything which is offensive, objectionable or illegal. Please consider using this feature if the need arises.
Advice for free
14. You should exercise the same caution with Private Messages as you would with any public posting.
Important !
This article explains in a general way the law that applies in Quebec. This article is not a legal opinion or legal advice. To find out the specific rules for your situation, consult a lawyer or notary.
I would say this is a very public dispute already. Just make sure you spell my name right.
As I said Vlad I do not know the specifics of the legal structure of the CFC so I have no plans to consult an attorney. No doubt you seem convinced that you have the whole thing beat legally. Allowing any type conflict of interest is bad form for any non profit, legal or not legal, especially if it can be easily avoided. Simply pick someone who has no interest in the matter and allow them to be the voting delegate. Of course if the CFC and Hal are openly for Kirsan then no conflict exists as far as casting the actual vote is concerned but the whole thing would still smell pretty bad. Even a "bumpkin" like you can figure out why.
That link is for Ontario provincially incorporated organizations like the OCA and not the CFC which is federally incorporated. The rules are different for federally incorporated non profit corporations.
As I said Vlad I do not know the specifics of the legal structure of the CFC so I have no plans to consult an attorney. No doubt you seem convinced that you have the whole thing beat legally.
I inherited a legal structure which has been in place for something like thirty eight years. You are the one making an extraordinary claim with respect to this particular FIDE election.
Allowing any type conflict of interest is bad form for any non profit, legal or not legal, especially if it can be easily avoided. Simply pick someone who has no interest in the matter and allow them to be the voting delegate. Of course if the CFC and Hal are openly for Kirsan then no conflict exists as far as casting the actual vote is concerned but the whole thing would still smell pretty bad. Even a "bumpkin" like you can figure out why.
This bumpkin is puzzled as to why there would be a conflict in Hal Bond voting if we voted for Garry but not if we voted for Kirsan.
Last edited by Vlad Drkulec; Monday, 12th May, 2014, 03:07 AM.
As far as a loss of anything, I just wonder if Canada could suffer any consequences if they vote against Kirsan and he wins.
We also need to be concerned with consequences if we vote against Kirsan and he loses. I have heard a great deal about why we should vote against Kirsan but relatively little on the subject of why we should vote for Garry. Its not too late to start. Dispel these creeping doubts which are fueled by the tactics of the GK supporters. There is a certain petulance being exhibited which I am trying hard not to charge to the GK campaign.
We also need to be concerned with consequences if we vote against Kirsan and he loses. I have heard a great deal about why we should vote against Kirsan but relatively little on the subject of why we should vote for Garry. Its not too late to start. Dispel these creeping doubts which are fueled by the tactics of the GK supporters. There is a certain petulance being exhibited which I am trying hard not to charge to the GK campaign.
Vlad, numerous reasons have been given why the CFC in Canada should vote for Gary including several reasons I have posted as well as an exhaustive list of benefits to Canada that were discussed with Hal Bond who actually initially confirmed in writing that he would support Gary after the meeting only to later report that the executive of the CFC was somewhat skeptical. One of the recurring themes that was actually discussed with Hal as well as something you have brought up here is that what is the fall out for Canada if Kirsan wins and Canada has endorsed Gary?
When I questioned your very own Hal about this very same issue he assured me that there was no downside at all for Canada should the above come to pass citing Canada's endorsement of Karpov as an example. So given that you respect Hal's views so much when it comes to FIDE has something changed? Did FIDE threaten Canada? I do not see other countries worried about this scenario, the USA included.
For that matter can you give me a single example of any country in the entire history of FIDE of a chess federation in any country suffering recriminations for endorsing the wrong way? I certainly don't know of any examples ....with the exception of FIDE holding a chess tournament in Libya where Israeli players were not allowed, but this was not tied to any election but was simply an act of discrimination based on where a player was born, even worst given that this was done while Kirsan was in charge and allowed a tournament to take place in a country with such an outrageous policy.
As Roger Patterson pointed out if this is something you are taking into account that candidate should not be even considered. One thing I do know for sure is that Gary is aware of this poll that shows zero votes for Kirsan and that it is very probable that the CFC's endorsement of Kirsan is a reflection of the executive and not a reflection of Canadian chess players. I agree with Roger that supporting a Candidate on the basis of avoiding recrimination is morally wrong and shows no principals.
So as a sponsor of Canadian Chess i will put a question to you, why would I not be turned off by an executive that shows that they are unprincipled?
The important question is whether or not there is an appearance of conflict of interest.
Yes that is the important question. Explain to me based on the laws of Canada or even the rules of the CFC which apply to us in this situation what the conflict of interest is beyond the fact that certain individuals in the GK campaign don't want Hal Bond to vote for Canada as he was elected by the governors to do. The only alternative I see under FIDE regulations is for me to go and vote. We are not going to give our proxy to the members of the GK campaign as was demanded by one of their representatives (if I am not misunderstanding what was communicated to me).
When the executives of Hockey Canada go back to their NHL clubs or go to international meetings of the international ice hockey federation do they run into this as well?
This bumpkin is puzzled as to why there would be a conflict in Hal Bond voting if we voted for Garry but not if we voted for Kirsan.
touché. This "debate" has been very enlightening and I'm probably not the only one who may just renew his CFC Membership, after a long hiatus, just because of the way you have conducted yourself here. Some of the other remarks here verge on personal attacks. (See below) It's my experience that when this happens, the side that initiates such attacks are usually losing the debate.
In that regard, please don't hesitate, if you feel that the attacks on you are getting way too personal and vicious, to let me know and I can warn the offending parties. I don't read every entry of every thread and I can miss some remarks quite easily. Cheers.
For those interested in who is leading the race for FIDE President, the following may be of interest...
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(For example, Sid Belsberg: "So as a sponsor of Canadian Chess i will put a question to you, why would I not be turned off by an executive that shows that they are unprincipled? ")
Last edited by Nigel Hanrahan; Monday, 12th May, 2014, 10:51 AM.
Dogs will bark, but the caravan of chess moves on.
touché. This "debate" has been very enlightening and I'm probably not the only one who may just renew his CFC Membership, after a long hiatus, just because of the way you have conducted yourself here. Some of the other remarks here verge on personal attacks. (See below) It's my experience that when this happens, the side that initiates such attacks are usually losing the debate.
In that regard, please don't hesitate, if you feel that the attacks on you are getting way too personal and vicious, to let me know and I can warn the offending parties. I don't read every entry of every thread and I can miss some remarks quite easily. Cheers.
For those interested in who is leading the race for FIDE President, the following may be of interest...
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(For example, Sid Belsberg: "So as a sponsor of Canadian Chess i will put a question to you, why would I not be turned off by an executive that shows that they are unprincipled? ")
Characterizing my post as an example of an attack that is personal and vicious is somewhat out of context. It was Vlad who said that he is concerned about negative repercussions by FIDE if Canada endorses the wrong way. Another poster on this board stated that even considering this as a possibility should morally eliminate this candidate as a choice. I happen to wholeheartedly agree with this hence my conclusion that this person is unprincipled. I see that you prefer to instead take my question out of that context that it was originally in. Vlad already said he has a very thick skin and I have no doubt that this is true. The question of why I or any other sponsor would be supportive of an organization that operates this way is a relevant and important question.
Thank you for posting the results of the race so far. They are disheartening, but at least I see that the majority of chess talk participants in the poll support Gary with only a single Kirsan vote after the poll was out for more then 5 days. That in my view speaks well for the chess players themselves in Canada.
Re: stormy, prolonged, tumultuous applause for ...
Sid,
What a pleasure it is to encounter a such good communicator as yourself! It is hard for me to see how anyone could not be convinced by your argument.
It would please me to have you as our guest invitee at the next Saturday Rapid tournament - on any Saturday, in fact. Not only do we have some tough players there (usually half the field is masters) but we also have regular discussions on many topics by some truly intelligent people.
If you wish to respond privately (yea or nay) I can always be reached by email vladdobrich(at)gmail(dot)com
Re: stormy, prolonged, tumultuous applause for ...
Sid. You have made some wonderful contributions to Canadian Elite Chess in the past. However, the fact that you are the one who is wearing two hats in this whole debate is a bit disappointing.
As a representative of the GK team you have attacked members of the Executive for not endorsing GK. On the other hand as a sponsor of Canadian Chess (at least in the past) you are using that as punishment for possible failure of us to fall into line.
I think a vast majority of potential sponsors aren't going to give a hoot about the state of International Chess Leadership, despite your stated position on this. Despite all of this, I'm hoping you might at some time change your mind and consider the wonderful chances we have on the International stage now - having secured two players in both of the past two World Cups and now featuring 3 GM's in the upcoming Olympiad with the other two players both possible GM titlists with a great performance in Norway. Women's Chess is slowly coming along with several strong juniors all coming along nicely and breaking ground for us.
I have known Hal Bond for 30 years. We are probably two of the longest standing CFC Governors (other than life Governors) in the country - both serving on the Executive many times. He has only had the best interests of Canadian Chess in any of his activities. Unlike you or I he is a chess professional, earning a living organizing and directing tournaments, and giving chess lessons. Any money he happens to receive through the odd FIDE event he works is a small portion of his income. I would assume that he will continue to receive the same sort of assignments at FIDE no matter which candidate he votes for or which candidate wins.
Vlad, numerous reasons have been given why the CFC in Canada should vote for Gary including several reasons I have posted as well as an exhaustive list of benefits to Canada that were discussed with Hal Bond who actually initially confirmed in writing that he would support Gary after the meeting only to later report that the executive of the CFC was somewhat skeptical. One of the recurring themes that was actually discussed with Hal as well as something you have brought up here is that what is the fall out for Canada if Kirsan wins and Canada has endorsed Gary?
I am not worried about retaliation from Kirsan if Canada votes for Gary. Where you asked about the possible downside of voting for Gary I stated the possible downside if Gary lost. It would be irresponsible for the executive not to consider this risk. I am also interested in the downside if Gary wins. It seems to me that no one can answer me satisfactorily why it is an acceptable outcome and not an abuse of power and position to have Salov boycotted out of chess and then to celebrate publicly this outcome. I don't know much about Salov beyond what I have been told of the situation and what I have read after several internet searches to confirm what I was told privately.
When I questioned your very own Hal about this very same issue he assured me that there was no downside at all for Canada should the above come to pass citing Canada's endorsement of Karpov as an example. So given that you respect Hal's views so much when it comes to FIDE has something changed? Did FIDE threaten Canada?
Actually all of the perceived and potential threats seem to be coming from the Kasparov campaign team and their supporters.
I do not see other countries worried about this scenario, the USA included.
I am well aware of the U.S. position after several long conversations with Ruth Haring USCF president. Perhaps if she had been in charge of the approach to Canada things might have gone a bit smoother.
For that matter can you give me a single example of any country in the entire history of FIDE of a chess federation in any country suffering recriminations for endorsing the wrong way? I certainly don't know of any examples ....with the exception of FIDE holding a chess tournament in Libya where Israeli players were not allowed, but this was not tied to any election but was simply an act of discrimination based on where a player was born, even worst given that this was done while Kirsan was in charge and allowed a tournament to take place in a country with such an outrageous policy.
I strongly support Israeli players right to participate in all FIDE events without discrimination. I believe that FIDE has policies in regard to prevention of discrimination and boycotts which should be adhered to.
As Roger Patterson pointed out if this is something you are taking into account that candidate should not be even considered.
At the moment the GK camp would be more negatively affected if we ruled out those from whom we fear retaliation. This is based on examples in the past behaviour of the candidate. The disrespect with which we have been treated in this campaign before your candidate has had his first whiff of power certainly gives me pause to hand over the deed and keys to the house and trust that things will be different this time.
I am well aware of the parable of the frog and the scorpion. This frog has a no hitchhiking scorpion policy on pond crossings. We are required by Canadian law to exercise independent judgement and make decisions based on the best interest of the Chess Federation of Canada and not in the best interest of you and your friends.
I have been warned that I personally might suffer consequences based on the experience of certain players who have drawn the ire of Gary in the past. Alas I have no ambitions on the FIDE stage. I was a reluctant candidate for president of the CFC. When I accepted the assignment I resolved to do the best job that I was capable of doing keeping the best interest of the chess public in mind at all times with the thought of creating a CFC that the kids that I teach chess can be proud to be members of. I see myself as a servant and not a master.
One thing I do know for sure is that Gary is aware of this poll that shows zero votes for Kirsan and that it is very probable that the CFC's endorsement of Kirsan is a reflection of the executive and not a reflection of Canadian chess players. I agree with Roger that supporting a Candidate on the basis of avoiding recrimination is morally wrong and shows no principals.
Explain the Salov situation to me in a way that makes me comfortable with trusting FIDE to Gary. My limited experience in life is that if you put an individual with a high opinion of himself and his skills in every area of life it is a concern to begin with. Gary is arguably the greatest chessplayer of all time but this doesn't translate into being the greatest leader or administrator.
So as a sponsor of Canadian Chess i will put a question to you, why would I not be turned off by an executive that shows that they are unprincipled?
Is the definition of unprincipled now "refuses to jump when I say jump"?
I understand that you are very rich and are used to getting your way. I understand that you could do a great deal for chess in Canada and that you did a great deal for chess back before I returned to chess after a ten year absence. I returned in 2007. This generosity certainly earns you some deference and respect but it does not earn you the right to bark orders and expect me to obey them like a trained dog. At times this is what these conversations seem like to me. I see GK supporters overthrowing federations and their leadership, ignoring the rules and where necessary rewriting the rules or attempting to rewrite the rules. There have definitely been some successes along this path but not enough to make a difference.
Canadian law requires that I perform due diligence and exercise independent judgement in every such decision on behalf of the CFC. My own personal beliefs require me to discern the truth in every situation as much as is possible and act in a way that leads to outcomes that advance the cause of truth. The ends don't justify the means. A very wise man told me that you can't reach a good chess position by passing through a bad one. I think this idea also applies in life. I am but a pawn but if I have to stand up to the king in order to do the job that I was entrusted with, so be it.
Last edited by Vlad Drkulec; Monday, 12th May, 2014, 02:41 PM.
Re: stormy, prolonged, tumultuous applause for ...
This certainly dispells the statement that "CFC is the ONLY federation among most civilized democratic nations that did not make an endorsement to Garry yet." As far as I can tell, the only major western dempcracy to endorse Gary is the USA. This explains a lot of the pressure.
Sid. You have made some wonderful contributions to Canadian Elite Chess in the past. However, the fact that you are the one who is wearing two hats in this whole debate is a bit disappointing.
As a representative of the GK team you have attacked members of the Executive for not endorsing GK. On the other hand as a sponsor of Canadian Chess (at least in the past) you are using that as punishment for possible failure of us to fall into line.
I think a vast majority of potential sponsors aren't going to give a hoot about the state of International Chess Leadership, despite your stated position on this. Despite all of this, I'm hoping you might at some time change your mind and consider the wonderful chances we have on the International stage now - having secured two players in both of the past two World Cups and now featuring 3 GM's in the upcoming Olympiad with the other two players both possible GM titlists with a great performance in Norway. Women's Chess is slowly coming along with several strong juniors all coming along nicely and breaking ground for us.
I have known Hal Bond for 30 years. We are probably two of the longest standing CFC Governors (other than life Governors) in the country - both serving on the Executive many times. He has only had the best interests of Canadian Chess in any of his activities. Unlike you or I he is a chess professional, earning a living organizing and directing tournaments, and giving chess lessons. Any money he happens to receive through the odd FIDE event he works is a small portion of his income. I would assume that he will continue to receive the same sort of assignments at FIDE no matter which candidate he votes for or which candidate wins.
That's my opinion.
Fred McKim
CFC Treasurer
Fred my issue is not about the choice but it is about the rationale behind the choice as I have so painstakingly articulated. As far as Hal is concerned any appearance of a conflict of interest should be avoided and has nothing at all to do with Hal's credentials or integrity. This would be true of anyone that is receiving any payments from FIDE no matter how insignificant. If anything it would serve Hal well as he would have an out if he ever was pressured by FIDE.
Having chess run from an organization that does not scare off legitimate sponsors would be a good thing and this is what the Kasparov campaign is about. I am not alone in having a different opinion then you on this matter. That being said,
Thank you for your opinion, I value it.
Last edited by Sid Belzberg; Monday, 12th May, 2014, 02:00 PM.
Tweet
Comment