CFC Presidency

[Paul Bonham]

Re: CFC Presidency

It is hard to be nice to people who seem only to be interested in attacking anyone who lifts his head for a moment out of the trenches, people who are not doers but only want to snipe from the grassy knoll. We can't return to the old ways. The world has changed.

There is nothing wrong with being a critic if your arguments are valid or at least contain some truth in them.

In the particular question of Hal Bond having a conflict of interest, someone put that out there and it is incumbent on anyone who wants integrity in the Executive to pursue that to a conclusion. You call that argument an "epic fail" which only shows you care nothing about integrity. This is perfectly in sync with you endorsing a person like KI.

Regarding your 'world has changed' argument: I really don't see anything in your policies that truly recognizes the extent of that. You are advocating growing the numbers of Juniors, because 'that's where future adult members come from'. But the payoff of that policy is overall negative financially and will only get more negative. The world has changed to where the vast, vast majority of adults in North America don't want to spend weekends away from their family to play a game that requires years of study and memorization just to be another no-name master in. None of your policies or actions address this fundamental problem, and it needs addressing NOW.

But shortly you will see not just how much the world has changed, but how a nimble and CREATIVE doer can adapt to that reality much better than a slow-footed POLITICAL doer. And the result for the CFC and other chess federations will be an even larger decline in membership, because those with vision and creativity can transform chess itself into something new and fresh... and very self-supporting. The dinosaur CFCosaurus will be too slow and brain-dead to adapt once the meteorite hits. But you'll still have Steve Douglas and the old boys network to drain money from and reminisce over the good old days.

[Sid Belzberg]

Re: CFC Presidency

We are not turning away past sponsors. We are refusing to vote the way you want us to because you sponsored an Olympiad team or two and a Closed ten years ago. You are turning yourself away because we won't do what you demand. We will find other sponsors. The FQE in the last couple of years has spent close to what you spent between the Canadian Closed and Canadian Open which they sponsored. You are the one trying to hold a gun to our head. The first time that I heard any implication that your promises were not conditional were here on chesstalk after the governors were already discussing it.

We do have to rely on volunteers and paying the executive won't help. It will just eat up the foundation money.

Vlad you have no track record of raising significant money for the CFC. What other sponsors will you find? Talk is cheap! By the way I did a lot more then the few things you itemized. I am sorry that you find endorsing Gary such a horrific demand. Instead you endorse one of the biggest thugs on the planet. Stop distorting what was said, in case you are unable to read the message was very clear in other posts. Any new expenses would have to funded from new revenues or from sponsors.No foundation money or other existing assets of the CFC would ever be touched.
Of course what can I expect from an apologist of Kirsan. i have never in my 55 years seen such a pile of BullSh*t then what you have produced in the last few months.
Here are a few tidbits of how you apologize for Kirsan.
1)Justifying his insanity (belief that he was abducted by alien) as a defense mechanism
2) His close friendship and association with Putin until today was denied entirely. Now you admit that it is true but he needs to do it for self preservation. Sorry his track record of consorting with a veritable who's who of rogues on this planet does not cast him in a sympathetic eye with western governments.
3)Explaining him keeping company with every dictator on earth of the 21st century as his peaceful Budhist nature.
4) His decision to hold the World Chess champion play offs in Libya that boycotted other countries as an innocent mistake that you would not have condoned.

You have made the CFC look like the laughing stock of the world and you have made a complete ass of yourself. What you are perpetrating is nothing but a sham that fortunately the world can see through and only a few of your cronies can not. Enjoy the lousy status quo with you and your friends if you win.

[Vlad Drkulec]

Re: CFC Presidency

There is nothing wrong with being a critic if your arguments are valid or at least contain some truth in them.

Some truth also implies some lies.

SNIP! justification of lying and prevaricating.

Regarding your 'world has changed' argument: I really don't see anything in your policies that truly recognizes the extent of that. You are advocating growing the numbers of Juniors, because 'that's where future adult members come from'. But the payoff of that policy is overall negative financially and will only get more negative.

You obviously can't read a balance sheet or financial statement if you can make such a statement with regard to the CFC and junior chess. On the adult side we make a small amount of money though that may not be the case this next year depending on the result of the fundraising for the Olympiad team. On the junior side we make more money and the challenge is to return some of that money to the kids and not have it sitting in a no interest bank account.

The world has changed to where the vast, vast majority of adults in North America don't want to spend weekends away from their family to play a game that requires years of study and memorization just to be another no-name master in. None of your policies or actions address this fundamental problem, and it needs addressing NOW.

We don't need the vast majority of adults though it would be nice to reach the same percentage of the population as the U.S. You have to call out to the ones that already like chess and evangelize the masses of people. In a school if you want to get one hundred chess players start with ten. You will soon have twenty, then thirty and so on. We don't advertise for people in Windsor who don't know how to play chess. We advertise looking for people and children who love to play chess. There are thousands of them out there. I do my lessons in public places like libraries and shopping malls and I always get three or four people stopping to watch and ask about lessons for themselves or their children or grandchildren. I have two new students that will likely start when I return to Windsor after the Canadian Open.

We lose lots of kids but we are adding new ones faster than we are losing them.

But shortly you will see not just how much the world has changed, but how a nimble and CREATIVE doer can adapt to that reality much better than a slow-footed POLITICAL doer. And the result for the CFC and other chess federations will be an even larger decline in membership, because those with vision and creativity can transform chess itself into something new and fresh... and very self-supporting. The dinosaur CFCosaurus will be too slow and brain-dead to adapt once the meteorite hits. But you'll still have Steve Douglas and the old boys network to drain money from and reminisce over the good old days.

Predictions of our demise are premature.

[Paul Bonham]

Re: CFC Presidency

Predictions of our demise are premature.

Not demise... just demoralizing decline.

[Steve Douglas]

Re: CFC Presidency

There is nothing wrong with being a critic if your arguments are valid or at least contain some truth in them.

In the particular question of Hal Bond having a conflict of interest, someone put that out there and it is incumbent on anyone who wants integrity in the Executive to pursue that to a conclusion. You call that argument an "epic fail" which only shows you care nothing about integrity. This is perfectly in sync with you endorsing a person like KI.

That's argumentative and ad hominem. If you think someone has a "conflict of interest" then *state* exactly what it is.

Regarding your 'world has changed' argument: I really don't see anything in your policies that truly recognizes the extent of that. You are advocating growing the numbers of Juniors, because 'that's where future adult members come from'. But the payoff of that policy is overall negative financially and will only get more negative.

How so?

The world has changed to where the vast, vast majority of adults in North America don't want to spend weekends away from their family to play a game that requires years of study and memorization just to be another no-name master in. None of your policies or actions address this fundamental problem, and it needs addressing NOW.

Chess *is* a intellectual "game that requires years of study and memorization". It's not about to change in that way. And at the end of the day many adults *do* spend their weekends playing it. (I realize you're not one of them.)

But shortly you will see not just how much the world has changed, but how a nimble and CREATIVE doer can adapt to that reality much better than a slow-footed POLITICAL doer.

Please let us all know then *you* do something.

And the result for the CFC and other chess federations will be an even larger decline in membership, because those with vision and creativity can transform chess itself into something new and fresh... and very self-supporting.

Please tell us how, o Sage.

The dinosaur CFCosaurus will be too slow and brain-dead to adapt once the meteorite hits. But you'll still have Steve Douglas and the old boys network to drain money from and reminisce over the good old days.

I really don't know what to say here. As far as I am concerned, you are the biggest waste of time on ChessTalk at the moment. You talk a lot, but do nothing. That's my opinion. I don't know who this "old boy's network" is that you are talking about. Please list the members. And exactly how am I draining money from the CFC?

I also have to ask: why do you keep bringing my name into things? I don't know you, and you don't know me.

Steve

[Michael Barron]

Re: CFC Presidency

You seem to be implying that I am somehow responsible for the state of decline of the CFC over how many years after a single year of being CFC president.

Vlad, I think, you're responsible for the state of decline of the CFC over last year and for years to come - looking how you're turning away volunteers and potential sponsors.

No but you probably should explain why the candidate that you are supporting and the Kasparov team seem to have an inside man on the governors forum feeding them confidential details of the discussions there.

Why should I explain that?
What are "confidential details" you're talking about?
Facts, please...

The president's power is really the ability to collaborate with people to get things done.

And you failed miserably in this regard.
You're doing everything alone - even members of your Executive team are unable to present a report once a quarter... :(

Jiaxin Liu. That is what convinced me that I needed to get involved in chess politics in the first place.

What do you know about Jiaxin Liu?
Facts, please...

It is a whole new set of laws which regulates how non-profits are required to conduct their affairs. Transitioning and continuing into the new act implied that we accepted these new laws.

How exactly these new laws are required to conduct CFC affairs?
Do they say a President could do whatever he wants, ignoring Assembly of Governors?
Facts, please...

[Vlad Drkulec]

Re: CFC Presidency

[QUOTE=Steve Douglas;82771]That's argumentative and ad hominem. If you think someone has a "conflict of interest" then *state* exactly what it is.[/QUOTE[

It is easier to puff up and pretend that he is on a serious errand than to state his complaint clearly and be laughed at for the ridiculousness of it all.

How so?

There is a youth fund to show the exact amount of the accumulated surplus from youth chess. Its not a huge amount but it is clearly not a deficit.

Chess *is* a intellectual "game that requires years of study and memorization". It's not about to change in that way. And at the end of the day many adults *do* spend their weekends playing it. (I realize you're not one of them.)

I'm not sure why he thinks people will want to play his variant if they don't want to be bothered playing the real thing.

Please let us all know then *you* do something.



Please tell us how, o Sage.



I really don't know what to say here. As far as I am concerned, you are the biggest waste of time on ChessTalk at the moment. You talk a lot, but do nothing. That's my opinion. I don't know who this "old boy's network" is that you are talking about. Please list the members. And exactly how am I draining money from the CFC?

I believe the implication was that we would drain money from you.

I also have to ask: why do you keep bringing my name into things? I don't know you, and you don't know me.

Steve

You hurt his widdle feelings by disagreeing with him. A capital crime in his world.

[Vlad Drkulec]

Re: CFC Presidency

Vlad, I think, you're responsible for the state of decline of the CFC over last year and for years to come - looking how you're turning away volunteers and potential sponsors.

I haven't turned away any volunteers. As for sponsors if not doing what they demand is turning away potential sponsors well we'll see how many agree with you very soon.

How exactly these new laws are required to conduct CFC affairs?

If you hadn't snoozed through the many meetings maybe you would know.

Do they say a President could do whatever he wants, ignoring Assembly of Governors?
Facts, please...

There is no assembly of governors. Its voting members now. I am not ignoring the voting members, I am telling you the law with respect to notice that you are required to follow like everyone else including me.

[Paul Bonham]

Re: CFC Presidency

That's argumentative and ad hominem. If you think someone has a "conflict of interest" then *state* exactly what it is.

Someone on the Executive in one of these FIDE presidential elections threads posted that Hal Bond earns money from FIDE for arbiting at events such as the last WC match, and other events. That post led Sasha Starr to believe Hal had a conflict of interest that, according to the CFC Handbook, should have had Hal not even participating in anything having to do with the FIDE election. Even thought the Handbook is now rendered non-binding because of the NFP Act, that clause is sure to be kept intact given that it addresses any conflict of interest in the strictest manner.

When Sasha and myself both pursued this possibility, that Hal appeared to have violated ethics if nothing else, it is revealed that Hal is NOT paid by FIDE after all.... with the added commentary "How dare people attack Hal Bond, most decent man in Canadian chess!" But that additional comment is not appropriate, because the 'attack' on Hal was led by a BELIEF in a conflict of interest. What I am saying is, when such a belief exists, it is prudent to INVESTIGATE the allegations to a conclusion. Not doing so would be not caring about ethics. Vlad says my argument is an 'epic fail', which shows a lack of concern for ethics.

Chess *is* a intellectual "game that requires years of study and memorization". It's not about to change in that way. And at the end of the day many adults *do* spend their weekends playing it. (I realize you're not one of them.)

Chess is a viable mental exercise, just like crossword puzzles or checkers. I am not saying one should not study chess. But as a competitive game, it is lacking. The kids that get interested in chess don't realize what they are getting into, it's only later in life that they see there's only so far they can go in chess, and that the further they go, the more they approach the natural apex which is to draw every game.

It is fine that some people are ok with doing this. But what I set out to do was to create a version that is more than that, and which also offers something exciting to watch for the non-playing spectator. Chess is forever financially limited because it cannot draw in the non-playing general public. Just to be able to bring in those people in large numbers is something that can transform the lives of even middle-of-the-road chess players.

Please tell us how, o Sage.

You'll have to wait for that... a few months yet. I finally found a team that is willing to co-invest with me, based on the sheer potential as outlined in my business plan. And so the development team is in place and no more prototyping, we are set to begin on the real thing. Looks like an October or November launch date. At first you may not hear of it... but eventually you will.

I really don't know what to say here. As far as I am concerned, you are the biggest waste of time on ChessTalk at the moment. You talk a lot, but do nothing. That's my opinion. I don't know who this "old boy's network" is that you are talking about. Please list the members. And exactly how am I draining money from the CFC?

I also have to ask: why do you keep bringing my name into things? I don't know you, and you don't know me.

I am doing something, you just don't know about it yet. Or as your hero Vlad likes to say, "All will be revealed in the fullness of time." Most if not all of my posts here are out of concern for a healthy chess environment in Canada, because a healthy CFC is going to be good for my business. The CFC can get kids into chess and get them to a certain level, at which point they can discover my game and realize how greener the pastures are on the other side of the fence and in addition how much more exciting and dynamic the game play is. And the numbers of them that will return to the CFC as adults will go way down even from the low numbers the CFC gets now.

And if Vlad Drkulec is President of the CFC when this reality sets in and the CFC were to decide (in the interest of survival) they wish to do any kind of partnership arrangement with my company (which will be forming a federation of players just like FIDE minus the corruption), I will have no inclination to talk with Vlad based on what I know of him as a human being: unconcerned with ethics, rigid world view, no creative abilities whatsoever, huge ego to the point of denigrating anyone who disagrees with him on anything, and just basically dishonest.

Vlad sticks to his guns that Sid's sponsorship offer had strings attached, yet we have Sid himself saying "No, there were never any strings attached." Sid even was willing to forgive Vlad his previous indiscretions, i.e. his quick insulting of Sid as if chess in Canada didn't need Sid at all. Even that wasn't enough: Vlad couldn't bring himself to say, "For the sake of the future of chess in Canada, for the kids that could benefit from Sid's sponsorship, let me try and reach a deal with Sid." No.... the stubborn fool just couldn't do it.

Vlad wrote in a previous posting: "Nothing is stopping anyone from forming a for-profit chess federation." He is smug in that statement because he can't imagine a successful for-profit chess federation ever coming along to challenge the CFC. He could learn something from the days when the National Football League never thought a rival American Football League could ever challenge their monopoly. Vlad even replied to you that he doesn't see how I'm going to get people to play what he calls my variant if they can't be bothered playing the real thing.

Well, Vlad and Steve, sometimes it takes a creative mind to think out of the box to create something new, and pretty soon the Vlads and Steves of the world slap their foreheads and say "How could I not have seen that coming?" Pete Rozelle probably did that when the New York Jets gave the AFL credibility in 1969.

About you personally Steve: you are like a turtle who keeps inside his shell and only pops his head out to say, "Hey, you, you're a bully and a troll!" That would be fine if you were spot on each time, but you aren't even close. Sasha Starr was not a troll to be asking the questions he was asking. He is someone deeply concerned with the future of chess in Canada. For you to poke your head out and disrespect him (oh, yes, I got that verb in again!) was actually turning the labels you used right back on YOU. And you cannot see this. Like Vlad, you have a rigid world view.

The 'old boys network' isn't a real network so much as it is just a label to apply to all those who think the status quo in chess is not to be messed with. You can have your status quo, I'm not out to destroy it, but don't tell me I can't mess with it to create something new. These are free countries we live in. The word 'disrespect' can be a verb. Things can change.

Now just go back in your shell and accept the fact that the world around you is changing. And even though I'm not out to destroy the status quo in chess, I do offer again the best advice I can for a rapidly changing world:

Adapt or perish.

[Sasha Starr]

Re: CFC Presidency

Dear Governors/Voting Members, CFC Members and past and future Members!
Today is the start of AGM, and incoming Voting Members have a chance to change the history of chess in Canada! In case they’ll elect me.
If not – I have no regrets; I’ve given the CFC a chance, and will continue enjoy life to the fullest! I’m happily married (you know whom), have a married daughter plus two grandchildren, who play chess but … only on iPads! Oh, well… Enjoy your wonderful Sunday (at least here in Toronto)!

[Vlad Drkulec]

Re: CFC Presidency

Vlad you have no track record of raising significant money for the CFC.

You're right. I have just been doing the best job I can as CFC president and the sponsors have been approaching us. We have had more sponsorship and discussions this year than in the seven that I have been involved in chess after taking a break from chess from 1996 to 2007. We have commitments for a total of $95,000 in sponsorship over this year and the next several years which have been disclosed to the governors. I am surprised that your deep throat didn't manage to mention that to you. I am not even counting the great things that the CMA and FQE have done recently in for the CFC in the area of sponsorship.

What other sponsors will you find? Talk is cheap!

You are right. Talk is cheap.

By the way I did a lot more then the few things you itemized.

I didn't know that. It has been such a long time since you sponsored anything and there has been such a turnover in the chess leadership that I don't know exactly what you did and probably no one currently involved in the CFC knows everything that you did. I have received emails from people involved in chess over many years and even they don't seem to know.

And a new CFC president arose who knew not Sid Belzberg. And Sid was wroth.

I am sorry that you find endorsing Gary such a horrific demand. Instead you endorse one of the biggest thugs on the planet.

I don't know that and have information that contradicts your interpretation. I do know who has acted like a thug in Canada and elsewhere and it is not Kirsan.

Stop distorting what was said, in case you are unable to read the message was very clear in other posts. Any new expenses would have to funded from new revenues or from sponsors.No foundation money or other existing assets of the CFC would ever be touched.

So sponsors would be approached and told that the CFC wants to pay its directors. Please give us money. Hmmmm... If that's the plan you are right. I am not the man for that job.

You have made the CFC look like the laughing stock of the world and you have made a complete ass of yourself. What you are perpetrating is nothing but a sham that fortunately the world can see through and only a few of your cronies can not. Enjoy the lousy status quo with you and your friends if you win.

I believe you and your friend Gary have tried to make the CFC look like the laughing stock of the world. Vice.com? Couldn't you do something better? Something with more credibility? I don't believe that you have succeeded. Even your allies are sending somewhat more respectful communications now as they ask for explanations for Canada's not acting in knee jerk unison with its traditional allies like the USCF. I don't think its a bad thing for people to realize that Canada will make its own decisions and shouldn't be taken for granted.

[Vlad Drkulec]

Re: CFC Presidency

Alas I have to abandon the fight on Chesstalk for a time to bring myself to the real arena: the election, the AGM and the voting members.

[Sid Belzberg]

Re: CFC Presidency

"So sponsors would be approached and told that the CFC wants to pay its directors. Please give us money. Hmmmm... If that's the plan you are right. I am not the man for that job."


As was stated any expenses must be accretive including the unlikely event that a director gets paid for something. Our point is that in order for the CFC to grow it can't rely entirely on volunteer work. The existing balance sheet must be preserved therefore unlike a normal company where raising money has it's costs in dilution to the shareholders an NFP can raise money and invest in programs to grow the organization.

"I believe you and your friend Garry have tried to make the CFC look like the laughing stock of the world. Vice.com? Couldn't you do something better? Something with more credibility? I don't believe that you have succeeded."

Nice try however none of the articles were solicited by us. you only have yourself to blame for Vice and THe Globe and Mail.

"I don't know that and have information that contradicts your interpretation. I do know who has acted like a thug in Canada and elsewhere and it is not Kirsan."
Really?? Why don't you enlighten us all and explain. The last information i saw was where you rationalized Kirsan's consorting with every rogue on the planet as part of his Buddhist nature. What an outrageous sham that was.


"I didn't know that. It has been such a long time since you sponsored anything and there has been such a turnover in the chess leadership that I don't know exactly what you did and probably no one currently involved in the CFC knows everything that you did. I have received emails from people involved in chess over many years and even they don't seem to know.

And a new CFC president arose who knew not Sid Belzberg. And Sid was wroth."

Here's the point. My first contact was Hal Bond who enthusiastically supported our goals that i presented in good faith. I was told by Hal he was going to Russia to be an arbiter for a FIDE candidates matches. He would get back to me afterwards but was sure that the executive would support his recommendation.

Unbeknownst to me was that he was instructed to use my good faith offer as a negotiating chip to see what he could extract from FIDE while in Russia.

The CFC acted in bad faith and that was the source of our so called acrimony "demands" and "disrespectful" behavior. At no point was i informed that my offer as a private sponsor and as a friend of Garry's was going to be used as a bidding war. This is not how you treat sponsors.

Anyways Vlad if you win today congrats. I find it galling that one of your execs had the nerve to email me yesterday soliciting my sponsorship if you win after you screwed both Garry and me. I felt like using that two word expression about reproducing yourself but found a more suitable three word expression. I suggested that the whole lot of you can go there.

[Sasha Starr]

Re: CFC Presidency

"We have commitments for a total of $95,000 in sponsorship over this year and the next several years which have been disclosed to the governors."
I haven't seen it on the Governors' Forum. What is the source and what are the strings attached? There is a fruitful (hopefully) discussion how to make the chess in Canada better. One of the most important thing especially in the Non-for Profit organization is transparency and openness. In the last year CFC's got about $1000. And now here comes announcement of $95,000! It doesn't look credible at all. And is consistent with your lies in the previous posts!

[Vlad Drkulec]

Re: CFC Presidency

"We have commitments for a total of $95,000 in sponsorship over this year and the next several years which have been disclosed to the governors."
I haven't seen it on the Governors' Forum. What is the source and what are the strings attached? There is a fruitful (hopefully) discussion how to make the chess in Canada better. One of the most important thing especially in the Non-for Profit organization is transparency and openness. In the last year CFC's got about $1000. And now here comes announcement of $95,000! It doesn't look credible at all. And is consistent with your lies in the previous posts!

The CFC got a sponsorship for the Olympiad team which pays the players appearance fees. This sponsorship is worth about $15,000 with possibilities for more since it is based on performance of the men's team. Since your wife is a member of the women's team she probably has some information that might enlighten you. The sponsor wishes to be anonymous at this time and has asked that he not be named. Please respect the confidentiality of the governors forum and the request of our significant sponsor from which your household is benefiting.

I understand that you have some challenges in the area of reading comprehension but it is all there in the confidential governors forum in which I see you are now posting. If you talk to the governor who has been feeding you confidential information about Hal Bond from the same forum perhaps he can explain it to you if he didn't sleep through that portion of the discussion.