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.
After your first sentence your post completely ignores what I wrote, Vlad.
Show me the conflict of interest that Hal has with respect to the FIDE vote from the point of view of the CFC. This addresses your post but I need to deal with a larger campaign here. I am engaged in a larger conversation which will determine what kind of CFC we might be able to become.
Hal is our elected representative. He is effective. I have consulted him on FIDE matters at least four times in the last month and he has delivered in each instance. Am I required to give this up to the great detriment of the CFC?
Last edited by Vlad Drkulec; Monday, 12th May, 2014, 02:20 PM.
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.
Thank you for the offer Nigel but I am a big boy and prefer to take them on directly and address their points one by one. I cannot lose here. Either the CFC will do the right things or I will be banished back to Windsor where I will do the right things for children's chess in the local community plotting my return on a wave of new CFC members. :)
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.
I will challenge any personal and vicious remarks directly.
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? ")
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.
Actually all of the perceived and potential threats seem to be coming from the Kasparov campaign team and their supporters.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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 advances 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.
All well and good but you still have not addressed the issue that Roger Patterson posed. I have been fortunate to have had some successes in life but this does not give you the right to depict me of being a spoiled cry baby if I don't get my way. Anything I have achieved in this world was on my sweat as the side of the family I came from were of humble means. I have a very strong belief and I simply call it as I see it. I am sure that you can find all kinds of issues with Gary and he would be the first to say that he is not a perfect angel. One thing for sure though, no one has accused him of murder or the plundering of an impoverished region.
Make no mistake about it, I don't expect you to do what I say, I do however, expect you to do what is reflective of the CFC member's desires even if the case was that they indeed preferred Kirsan.
Still not get your position. You came here for opinions of others. Instead of saying "thank you for expressed opinions", you condemn them. I see the CFC stance at this moment as of the Buridan's donkey.
my 2cts: both candidates are not white sheep. On other hand, the CFC has no obligation to endorse any of them publicly. The Execs might decide (by voting) the way how the delegate will cast the vote.
Putting back history and looking into the candidates' programs: Kasparov's is more preferable. The Kirsan's waste of time Olympic theme does not impress me at all.
Re: Endorsemeent over Vote: FIDE Election for President
I know you can read, Vlad. I wrote the "appearance of a conflict of interest" not "conflict of interest". You keep addressing the latter. This conversation could be better held on the Governors Forum.
That all said, you appear to have a mess on your hands.
I know you can read, Vlad. I wrote the "appearance of a conflict of interest" not "conflict of interest". You keep addressing the latter. This conversation could be better held on the Governors Forum.
That all said, you appear to have a mess on your hands.
I think I have read this entire thread (there are some minutes I will never get back...) and I wonder if anyone can answer the following questions:
1. Is an endorsement of candidate X an implication that the federation votes for X ?
2. Will the CFC endorsement (assuming one occurs) be made public? [one hopes so, otherwise it is rather useless]
3. WHO decides who the CFC endorses/votes for?
4. Is the eventual vote by the Federation known publicly?
It appears that there is some argument about #3 - I gather Bob Armstrong was arguing it *should* be the Governors whereas Vlad is arguing it is (presumably) the Executive or (gasp?) the President?
It seems the USCF has the chops to endorse one of the candidates and have done so early or at least in time for it to perhaps influence the undecided Federations. It seems they don't much care about possible recriminations.
I am not much of a fan of GK's leadership style, but I call the other one "IllusionOf" for a reason... I wish there were other choices, but like the provincial election here, we have to determine who may do the least harm.
as vindictive possibilities for failure to vote the right way should tell you what the moral choice is.
I can understand why one might not be happy with Kasparov as a candidate and have doubts as to his ability to govern properly. But, to my mind, it's not really a choice.
"Tom is a well known racist, and like most of them he won't admit it, possibly even to himself." - Ed Seedhouse, October 4, 2020.
Wow... Garry getting dominated. Why are we arguing here about Kirsan and Garry? Kirsan will obviously win. FIDE is corrupt. So is the IOC and FIFA.
That's actually an important observation. Although maybe it might alternately be said that FIDE is an example in which the arm-twisting and buying of votes by the US (and its client states) does not exceed that by rival states to the US. And that's where the complaining reaches a clamorous din.
Some of us don't follow the Olympics as much as we used to, partly because the IOC conducts itself like a little fiefdom when it comes to town (or a police state if you prefer), violating many of the principles upon which the Olympic movement was founded, partly because the use of performance-enhancing substances is so ubiquitous, and partly because the amateur ideal has been so brutally destroyed by those determined to turn a great global sporting event into a greasy cheeseburger with fries. I'd rather have a root canal without anasthetic.
Dogs will bark, but the caravan of chess moves on.
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.
An online poll isn't really a good way to determine the views of a membership, even if participation is free. Furthermore, people are elected to positions of responsibility in order to make decisions on behalf of the membership. They have access to more information and can assess the realpolitik of a situation better than most members. To me, ignoring realpolitik would be naiive and block-headed in the worst way- not immoral, but rather just dumb.
Anyway, carry on.
Last edited by Nigel Hanrahan; Monday, 12th May, 2014, 07:42 PM.
Reason: spelling
Dogs will bark, but the caravan of chess moves on.
I think I have read this entire thread (there are some minutes I will never get back...) and I wonder if anyone can answer the following questions:
1. Is an endorsement of candidate X an implication that the federation votes for X ?
Yes.
2. Will the CFC endorsement (assuming one occurs) be made public? [one hopes so, otherwise it is rather useless]
Yes.
3. WHO decides who the CFC endorses/votes for?
The board of directors aka the executive.
4. Is the eventual vote by the Federation known publicly?
No.
It appears that there is some argument about #3 - I gather Bob Armstrong was arguing it *should* be the Governors whereas Vlad is arguing it is (presumably) the Executive or (gasp?) the President?
The president has no plans to travel to Tromso.
It seems the USCF has the chops to endorse one of the candidates and have done so early or at least in time for it to perhaps influence the undecided Federations. It seems they don't much care about possible recriminations.
I am not much of a fan of GK's leadership style, but I call the other one "IllusionOf" for a reason... I wish there were other choices, but like the provincial election here, we have to determine who may do the least harm.
We'll soon see. Like in chess, winning in chess politics is everything.
I never assume the past predicts the future. Yet you're telling me the history of FIDE of not retaliating and presumably projecting that to the future.
The CFC should do what's best for Canadian Chess and the players and let the Americans look after themselves. Something they are quite good at doing without our help. I don't know what's in it for the Americans but the CFC should figure out what's in it for themselves for supporting one candidate over another.
National federations, like nations, don't have friends. They have interests. Something Vlad seems to understand.
You have a good understanding of my work and my perceptions of this whole situation. I am not surprised.
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.
Our job is to separate the rhetoric from the reality. One should not be surprised when the advertising campaign engages in some puffery.
All well and good but you still have not addressed the issue that Roger Patterson posed.
Look at all checks, captures and threats no matter how far fetched they seem. Identify all of the ideas, strategies, tactics and themes that may apply in the position. Identify all of your weaknesses and potential weaknesses. It hardly seems fair to indict Kirsan because I was being thorough.
I have been fortunate to have had some successes in life but this does not give you the right to depict me of being a spoiled cry baby if I don't get my way.
You are doing a great deal of projecting here and in another type of thread and with another person I might use that information to score some cheap points. I have to bite my tongue at times or at least do some editing.
Anything I have achieved in this world was on my sweat as the side of the family I came from were of humble means.
We've obviously hit on a hot button here. I think that the fact that you were able to raise yourself from humble means is a testament to your intelligence and your hard work and your ability to apply your God given talents in a creative way. I think its great. I think you're great. I'm happy for you. I wish there were more people like you in the world. Does that mean that I am going to buy everything that you are selling? No.
I have a very strong belief and I simply call it as I see it.
As do I.
I am sure that you can find all kinds of issues with Gary and he would be the first to say that he is not a perfect angel.
Throw me a bone here. Is he at least sorry about Salov? Can he see that it isn't the optimal strategy to pursue?
One thing for sure though, no one has accused him of murder or the plundering of an impoverished region.
Accusations are not the same as proof.
Make no mistake about it, I don't expect you to do what I say, I do however, expect you to do what is reflective of the CFC member's desires even if the case was that they indeed preferred Kirsan.
My understanding and reading of the government regulations tell me that I don't have that luxury. Things would be easier if we could commission a poll to determine our response to everything. I am required to act in the best interests of the CFC, whatever I perceive them to be.
Tweet
Comment