List of current CFC voting members?

[Hugh Brodie]

Re: List of current CFC voting members?

Eliminate membership fees and raise rating fees (perhaps a percentage of the entry fee). Thus - infrequent players aren't penalized and would be more likely to play more often.

[Fred McKim]

Re: List of current CFC voting members?

Eliminate membership fees and raise rating fees (perhaps a percentage of the entry fee). Thus - infrequent players aren't penalized and would be more likely to play more often.

1. Effectively everybody who played in a CFC tournament would become the equivalent of a life member. Information would still have to be retained to uniquely identify players.

2. Current life members may have a claim on the CFC for some unused portion of their membership fee. The Foundation would stop growing.

3. Administrative services cost the CFC $40,000. Updating the membership dates in the database and the accounting work involved, I would guess accounts for maybe 10-15% of the ExD's time. As mentioned previously the Membership revenue is $47,000. Rating fees ($32,000) would probably have to at least double. In keeping with Hugh's comment, rating fees could have a sliding scale depending on tournament entry fee.

[Neil Frarey]

Re: List of current CFC voting members?

And further to build our base, I would like to also develop these enablers.


Eliminate the Tournament Membership:

I get why the T.M. is in place, but I also get why it is seen as prohibitive cost by those just wanting to play in a weekend tourney.


Offer a Tournament Free Trail:

For instance those who, for one good reason or another, want to come off-line and experience an OTB tournament. So when combined with the elimination of the T.M. the Chess Federation of Canada's associations would be in a great place to tap the online players and the chess enthusiasts alike.

Of conditions would apply such as not having access to the prize fund and I imagine they would be registered as a UNR(?).


I got more ... but I'm sure you're still in shock so I'll save 'em.


But one thing I would like to add; Active rating fee be raised to that of Regular rating fee.

[Paul Bonham]

Re: List of current CFC voting members?

IANAL (I am not a lawyer). I see no penalty in the act for the corporation which can obviously not be incarcerated in prison for six months since it is a legal entity and not a physical one. The only person liable for the penalty appears to be the voting member who asks for a list of members and then uses it for some purpose other than the one for which he has a right to use the information for....

In that case, if there are in the Act no specified penalties to the Corporation....

(... and your argument about "the corporation which can obviously not be incarcerated in prison for six months since it is a legal entity and not a physical one" is a hilarious diversion. Corporation officers can obviously be incarcerated in prison for things like fraud, and there are also civil injunctions that can be filed. In fact, I wonder why you would mention all that given that you started a recent thread about Robert Hamilton suing the CFC....)

...it seems to me that the CFC can publicly publish the information of the voting members, as I stated beforehand....

If there is no such penalty, then:

- the CFC can publish the up to date list with impunity, and the only penalties are to members who use that information in any way except those purposes described in the Act.

[Fred McKim]

Re: List of current CFC voting members?

And further to build our base, I would like to also develop these enablers.


Eliminate the Tournament Membership:

I get why the T.M. is in place, but I also get why it is seen as prohibitive cost by those just wanting to play in a weekend tourney.


Offer a Tournament Free Trail:

For instance those who, for one good reason or another, want to come off-line and experience an OTB tournament. So when combined with the elimination of the T.M. the Chess Federation of Canada's associations would be in a great place to tap the online players and the chess enthusiasts alike.

Of conditions would apply such as not having access to the prize fund and I imagine they would be registered as a UNR(?).


I got more ... but I'm sure you're still in shock so I'll save 'em.


But one thing I would like to add; Active rating fee be raised to that of Regular rating fee.

I like Hugh's idea that rating fee could be based on tournament entry fee (if there was some change to base funding) - but I also think it makes perfect sense for the Quick chess events to be less costly - these aren't very serious tournaments, but are useful for progress of younger & improving players.

I would suggest that organizers offer free entry fees to help bring in new players. Another idea would be to have a National Chess Day (Weekend) with no CFC memberships or rating fees required - maybe that is something for you to run with.

[Egidijus Zeromskis]

Re: List of current CFC voting members?

I would suggest that organizers offer free entry fees to help bring in new players.

Why can not the CFC make that move - no CFC membership for first comers? LOL

imho: a new player, who would come the first time to a weekend tournament, will never show up again. After spending many hours over weekend, and probably loosing most of the games, he would decide that there are many other better leisure activities over the weekend. (add to that other weekend tournament is probably after many months...)

imho2: regular meetings attract more players, and those players more often play weekend events. (nobody finishes a marathon without proper training)

[Vlad Drkulec]

Re: List of current CFC voting members?

In that case, if there are in the Act no specified penalties to the Corporation....

(... and your argument about "the corporation which can obviously not be incarcerated in prison for six months since it is a legal entity and not a physical one" is a hilarious diversion. Corporation officers can obviously be incarcerated in prison for things like fraud, and there are also civil injunctions that can be filed. In fact, I wonder why you would mention all that given that you started a recent thread about Robert Hamilton suing the CFC....)

...it seems to me that the CFC can publicly publish the information of the voting members, as I stated beforehand....

If there is no such penalty, then:

- the CFC can publish the up to date list with impunity, and the only penalties are to members who use that information in any way except those purposes described in the Act.

Well then I suggest you run for the executive, win and publish the list to test out your theory. The member who released the information without the written consent of every voting member whose name was released would be subject to six months in prison and a $25,000 fine. The act does not exempt members of the executive from these penalties. The tales I have heard suggest that prison is not a pleasant place. I have better things to spend money on than fines and lawyers whose fees could easily be more than the fines.

Given how difficult it is to even fill out the full roster of VMs with engaged people, shaming inactive voting members is not high on my list of priorities.

[Kerry Liles]

Re: List of current CFC voting members?

Well then I suggest you run for the executive, win and publish the list to test out your theory. The member who released the information without the written consent of every voting member whose name was released would be subject to six months in prison and a $25,000 fine. The act does not exempt members of the executive from these penalties. The tales I have heard suggest that prison is not a pleasant place. I have better things to spend money on than fines and lawyers whose fees could easily be more than the fines.

Given how difficult it is to even fill out the full roster of VMs with engaged people, shaming inactive voting members is not high on my list of priorities.

There may be many reasons for inactivity - many of them temporary or quite legitimate.
Unless one knows the details, it would be foolish to arbitrarily call out those who did not vote (for example).

Anyone contemplating volunteering for a CFC position should simply scan this board for a preview of the fun times they
would be about to experience. Being critical is easy from the armchair by the fire; actually doing something requires quite a bit of effort and apparently very thick skin.

[Egidijus Zeromskis]

Re: List of current CFC voting members?

Given how difficult it is to even fill out the full roster of VMs with engaged people, shaming inactive voting members is not high on my list of priorities.

There is no need to shame them, just kick out inactive ones. The board has the power to do that. If someone does not bother at least to participate in the meetings and vote, than it will be a little to loss to anybody.

[Egidijus Zeromskis]

Re: List of current CFC voting members?

There may be many reasons for inactivity - many of them temporary or quite legitimate.
Unless one knows the details, it would be foolish to arbitrarily call out those who did not vote (for example).

The person commits for one year to become a VM. Of course the chessplayers are the worst for planning LOL

[Bob Armstrong]

Re: List of current CFC voting members?

There is no need to shame them, just kick out inactive ones. The board has the power to do that. If someone does not bother at least to participate in the meetings and vote, than it will be a little to loss to anybody.

Hi Egis:

Where in the NFPCA does it give the power to VM's to "kick out" other VM's? And are there any specifications, if they can do it, as to what the grounds must be? And is failing to attend VM meetings and to vote two of them? And if so, what percentage of meetings/votes must they miss.

Finally, the Provincial/Territorial Associations send the VM's from their province to both act in the best interests of CFC, and to act in their best interests at the same time. If a VM is to be "recalled", wouldn't one expect that it would be the provincial/territorial association that had the power to do this, since they sent the representative VM? As discussed in another thread, in the past, CFC could only reject those sent by the province/territory on purely technical grounds (Like not being a CFC member), and not on performance grounds. Is that still the case?

Bob A

[Egidijus Zeromskis]

Re: List of current CFC voting members?

Hi Egis:

Where in the NFPCA does it give the power to VM's to "kick out" other VM's? And are there any specifications, if they can do it, as to what the grounds must be? And is failing to attend VM meetings and to vote two of them? And if so, what percentage of meetings/votes must they miss.

Open the CFC by-laws, the one of the last articles how the members can be removed from the organization. (it's a whole process) While the provincial organization send (is it even written procedure? or just left over from the past), the CFC accepts them, and of course can decline or remove too.

[Vlad Drkulec]

Re: List of current CFC voting members?

There is no need to shame them, just kick out inactive ones. The board has the power to do that. If someone does not bother at least to participate in the meetings and vote, than it will be a little to loss to anybody.

There is a very special procedure for removal of a voting member. I did not think it prudent to invoke that clause when there was a person who did deserve to be removed. Inactivity is not a good reason or even one that is included in the reasons someone can be removed.


Member Discipline

The board shall have authority to suspend or expel any member from the Corporation for any one or more of the following grounds:

a. violating any provision of the articles, by-laws, or written policies of the Corporation;

b. carrying out any conduct which may be detrimental to the Corporation as determined by the board in its sole discretion;

c. for any other reason that the board in its sole and absolute discretion considers to be reasonable, having regard to the purpose of the Corporation.

In the event that the board determines that a member should be expelled or suspended from membership in the Corporation, the president, or such other officer as may be designated by the board, shall provide twenty (20) days notice of suspension or expulsion to the member and shall provide reasons for the proposed suspension or expulsion. The member may make written submissions to the president, or such other officer as may be designated by the board, in response to the notice received within such twenty (20) day period. In the event that no written submissions are received by the president, the president, or such other officer as may be designated by the board, may proceed to notify the member that the member is suspended or expelled from membership in the Corporation. If written submissions are received in accordance with this section, the board will consider such submissions in arriving at a final decision and shall notify the member concerning such final decision within a further twenty (20) days from the date of receipt of the submissions. The board's decision may be appealed to the class A voting members at the next regularly scheduled quarterly meeting.

The board decision may be overturned by a simple majority of class A voting members at the next quarterly meeting or alternatively in a special meeting called for by the board or 5% of the class A voting members.

[Vlad Drkulec]

Re: List of current CFC voting members?

Hi Egis:

Where in the NFPCA does it give the power to VM's to "kick out" other VM's? And are there any specifications, if they can do it, as to what the grounds must be? And is failing to attend VM meetings and to vote two of them? And if so, what percentage of meetings/votes must they miss.

Finally, the Provincial/Territorial Associations send the VM's from their province to both act in the best interests of CFC, and to act in their best interests at the same time. If a VM is to be "recalled", wouldn't one expect that it would be the provincial/territorial association that had the power to do this, since they sent the representative VM? As discussed in another thread, in the past, CFC could only reject those sent by the province/territory on purely technical grounds (Like not being a CFC member), and not on performance grounds. Is that still the case?

Bob A

The power to kick voting members out resides with the board but the voting members can overturn such a board decision by a simple majority vote.

[Bob Armstrong]

Re: List of current CFC voting members?

There is a very special procedure for removal of a voting member. I did not think it prudent to invoke that clause when there was a person who did deserve to be removed. Inactivity is not a good reason or even one that is included in the reasons someone can be removed.


Member Discipline

The board shall have authority to suspend or expel any member from the Corporation for any one or more of the following grounds:

a. violating any provision of the articles, by-laws, or written policies of the Corporation;

b. carrying out any conduct which may be detrimental to the Corporation as determined by the board in its sole discretion;

c. for any other reason that the board in its sole and absolute discretion considers to be reasonable, having regard to the purpose of the Corporation.

In the event that the board determines that a member should be expelled or suspended from membership in the Corporation, the president, or such other officer as may be designated by the board, shall provide twenty (20) days notice of suspension or expulsion to the member and shall provide reasons for the proposed suspension or expulsion. The member may make written submissions to the president, or such other officer as may be designated by the board, in response to the notice received within such twenty (20) day period. In the event that no written submissions are received by the president, the president, or such other officer as may be designated by the board, may proceed to notify the member that the member is suspended or expelled from membership in the Corporation. If written submissions are received in accordance with this section, the board will consider such submissions in arriving at a final decision and shall notify the member concerning such final decision within a further twenty (20) days from the date of receipt of the submissions. The board's decision may be appealed to the class A voting members at the next regularly scheduled quarterly meeting.

The board decision may be overturned by a simple majority of class A voting members at the next quarterly meeting or alternatively in a special meeting called for by the board or 5% of the class A voting members.

Hi Vlad:

Thanks very much for providing members with the details on this issue.

What I have found interesting is the sequence of decision-making re a VM for whom their are grounds for removal:

"The board's decision may be appealed to the class A voting members at the next regularly scheduled quarterly meeting.

The board decision may be overturned by a simple majority of class A voting members at the next quarterly meeting or alternatively in a special meeting called for by the board or 5% of the class A voting members."

I had not realized that the "Board" (= the Executive Committee) made the first decision (And that will be the final one unless the VM appeals to the VM Council).

I must admit I do find the "Ground b." somewhat worriesome......I believe the Governors passed this part of the By-Law (I think this is where it is from, no?) themselves (Not imposed by the NFPCA)? If I am remembering correctly (And my memory is much worse than most) I had argued against it at the time, because I feared that it could be used against a thorn in the side of the Establishment......what is "detrimental" to the corporation depends a lot sometimes on politics. In any event, if I am remembering correctly, I lost that one, and here it is....hope it operates properly.....that will depend on the Executive decision-making.

Bob A