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.
If Eric will ever authorize Lyle, Secretary, to release the results of the 2010-11 Budget vote, then maybe we governors would be able to disclose to you this year's budget, so you can see for yourself where the money is going. Hopefully the vote results, and the budget, will be in GL # 5, which is currently in preparation, and must be issued before the July 12-13 AGM.
That's certainly the impression I took away from his post. Otherwise, his big idea is to get more CFC members by having ..... more CFC members. And that it's never occured to club organizers anywhere that they try to get new members.
But Kevin being Kevin, nothing will come of it. He certainly doesn't have any realistic idea of the money involved in the Bundesliga (my estimate would be ~$50,000/yr + per team, confirmed by some of the comments here http://www.chessninja.com/dailydirt/...iga-07-r89.htm) . He seems to think those teams are funded purely by the financial contribution of clubs of 100 members. Good luck getting a club member to toss in an extra $500 a year for the privilige of being represented by a semi-professional team.
-If mega-clubs can be part of the means to phase out class prizes (as some people I've mentioned previously might wish) then call it a hustle if you wish. My second post in this thread pointed out other, less controversial benefits to having more 'mega-clubs'. Vlad has done a good job fleshing out the vision of such clubs and how the CFC might better help them come about.
-My intuition tells me club organizers are seldom motivated to go out and get more members unless someone would give them more motivation than settling for a modest number of members that they have grown to feel comfortable with. Anyway, I've been to a handful of club executive meetings in more than one town, and such established clubs never show signs of being raring to go out and do a membership drive, just like the CFC itself.
-You took me too literally when I used the Bundesliga as an example of a strong team league. We won't have such significant numbers of such strong players ready to congregate any time soon on this continent. I was thinking, for now, of strong players by Canadian chess standards. That could be just teams of 2200+ players in some regions.
In any case, a Bundesliga type league in the far future is something to dream of, yes, and this is only chesstalk, so why not dream? This is not the CFC Executive Discussion Board, where presumably more in-the-present, down-to-earth discussions take place :). Being Kevin, I am only being the impractical visionary at the moment. Impractical, I know, because 100 years from now, the CFC will probably be stuck in the same damn rut it has been for decades, not counting the odd financial catacylism. But I forget. I am not supposed to be Kevin, the cynical CFC basher .
Anything that can go wrong will go wrong. Murphy's law, by Edward A. Murphy Jr., USAF, Aerospace Engineer
-You took me too literally when I used the Bundesliga as an example of a strong team league. We won't have such significant numbers of such strong players ready to congregate any time soon on this continent. I was thinking, for now, of strong players by Canadian chess standards. That could be just teams of 2200+ players in some regions.
In any case, a Bundesliga type league in the far future is something to dream of, yes, and this is only chesstalk, so why not dream? This is not the CFC Executive Discussion Board, where presumably more in-the-present, down-to-earth discussions take place :). Being Kevin, I am only being the impractical visionary at the moment. Impractical, I know, because 100 years from now, the CFC will probably be stuck in the same damn rut it has been for decades, not counting the odd financial catacylism. But I forget. I am not supposed to be Kevin, the cynical CFC basher .
At one time SWOCL was an actual chess league with teams playing each other from London, Kitchener and Hamilton and other cities. I believe that there was an A and B league but my memory may be faulty. Much of my early chess play was in team events such as the local high school league (now defunct) and later the Detroit Metro Chess League where Windsor was a perennial powerhouse finishing first or second every year in the top league with as many as four or five teams of six players spread out over the various divisions if my memory is correct. Later that dropped to four players per team. 9/11 killed our participation as the border became more unpredictable. There is still a Detroit Metro Chess League but it is much smaller. In the 1970s there would be hundreds of players gathering one Friday per month in a gigantic church hall. Even in the 1990s the league was still going fairly strong at the Southfield Civic Center.
Afterwards we would go for pizza and Milan Vukadinov and Ray Stone would hold court and go over our games and show us theirs between bites of pizza at the Volcano, then later Franco's and finally the Trevi right at the tunnel entrance.
There were also team events in Michigan and Ohio that I remember attending. There was one where we went in the midst of a terrible winter storm and drove up the night before, spending about eight or nine hours for a trip that should have taken four. A lot of people ended up in the ditches on the way there that night but Ray Stone's driving skills got us there in one piece.
There was a natural progression from the high school league to the Detroit Metro League. Those were some of the best chess experiences I ever had.
-My intuition tells me club organizers are seldom motivated to go out and get more members unless someone would give them more motivation than settling for a modest number of members that they have grown to feel comfortable with. Anyway, I've been to a handful of club executive meetings in more than one town, and such established clubs never show signs of being raring to go out and do a membership drive, just like the CFC itself.
Often clubs grow in spite of themselves. The local club that I attend once or twice a week only has room for a dozen or so players. I am appalled at how some of the regulars treat newbies. [I am also appalled that Herb doesn't know that mate wins and ends the game even if the flag falls half a second later in blitz chess but that is another story...].
Bob wrote: If Eric will ever authorize Lyle, Secretary, to release the results of the 2010-11 Budget vote, then maybe we governors would be able to disclose to you this year's budget, so you can see for yourself where the money is going.
Ken promises that if the results aren't released by Monday, June 21, 2010, I'll make public the document that the Governors voted on.
... -My intuition tells me club organizers are seldom motivated to go out and get more members unless someone would give them more motivation than settling for a modest number of members that they have grown to feel comfortable with. Anyway, I've been to a handful of club executive meetings in more than one town, and such established clubs never show signs of being raring to go out and do a membership drive, just like the CFC itself.
Kevin, nothing stops you, for example, from advertising the RA club to your non-member friends and acquaintances. Why do you think the RA club has as many members as it does? To help you, I will give you a hint: start with Larry Bevand and draw the flowchart from there.
"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.
Bob wrote: If Eric will ever authorize Lyle, Secretary, to release the results of the 2010-11 Budget vote, then maybe we governors would be able to disclose to you this year's budget, so you can see for yourself where the money is going.
Ken promises that if the results aren't released by Monday, June 21, 2010, I'll make public the document that the Governors voted on.
About the 2010-11 Budget, Eric Van Dusen had this to say in GL # 3 ( Egis' link above ):
" The Treasurer, Maurice Smith, will be working closely with EKG to make the financial statement for the current year and draw up the next budget. Should any of you have any particular concerns regarding the priorities of the CFC, I encourage you to contact our Treasurer, or any other, executive member. "
The budget was subsequently presented in mid-March, Maurice responded to governor comments/questions on the confidential Governors' Discussion Board, and it was voted on by March 31.
Neither the budget nor the vote results have ever been made public yet ( the CFC fiscal year 2010-11 started May 1 ).
Bob
Last edited by Bob Armstrong; Friday, 18th June, 2010, 10:35 AM.
Other programs is a +59078, and a -59078 so basically irrelevant bookkeeping. Sales is a +15532 and a -12604, so overall a net +2928. Foundation is +2718 and a -1170 so net +1548. Combine with rating fees, memberships, donation, and other revenue, the CFC had basically $62,883 in revenue to use last year.
So, lets talk about the two major sources of revenue for the CFC: memberships + ratings (comprising 88% of the unallocated funds). When you have an organization, you should be pushing to increase your revenue sources. However, they are contributing a very impressive 3.5% of their annual available funds towards club support, and nothing towards direct tournament support. What exactly this "admin services" section includes should be a source of great interest to the CFC governers and executive.
Has the CFC ever done any sort of analysis of their player base, the value of a new signup on average, and the cost to maintain an existing player?
I think that there is s strong misunderstand of how clubs works in Europe. I will take the example of France. Anyone who go to the Federation office to buy a membership will be in for a big surprise. You do not buy a membership, you buy a licence to play Competitive Chess an the licence is sold under the name "licence", not under the name "membership". This avoid the ugly stance members have no rights in the Constitution because the players are not members. Then you will ask for a licence, but they will tell you that a licence can only be purchased at a club : the national Federation does not sell licences.
Every licence is linked to a club, This has two main consequences : you can play rated team chess only for your own club (as Carey Price can only play hockey for the Montreal's Canadian) and you may select Governor only at your club AGM. The clubs are the only structure that name Governors who will elect the board of directors of the national Federation. The number of Governors depends on the number of licences sold by the club. In some countries, the number of Governors depends on the amount of the rating fees paid by the club. In general, the more money a clubs brings in, the more Governors it will get. Off course, there is a maximum number of Governors per club.
The national Federation is also much more authoritarian. For example, they are not shy to mandate that all clubs who register a team in the prestigious competition A must also register a team in the lesser competition B. Failure to comply means the expulsion of the team from the prestigious competition. They see no problem with forcing the clubs to develop arbiters. They do so by mandating that all clubs who register a team in the prestigious competition A must have an Certified arbiter of at least level X, failing that, the club's team will be expelled from the prestigious competition. If you are wondering why the equivalent of the Provincial Associations do nothing against that, you have to remember that since they are not a club, they are entitled to zero (0) Governors. Furthermore, everybody in a position of authority at all levels, down to the club level, is subject to dismissal from of his position by the national Federation. Even the clubs board of directors must sign a document in which they recognise that the club must follow the Constitution and Bylaws of the national Federation and those two documents gives the right to the national Federation to use both its Discipline Committee and its Ethic Committee to dismiss almost anybody who has a licence. The same two documents forbid affiliated clubs from accepting any person who refuses to purchase a licence, they also mandate that all directors of a club must have a licence, and more generally, that anybody with a glimpse of authority must have a licence. Off course, the national Federation can revoke the licence and this revocation immediately disqualify an individual from all positions of authority at all levels.
But all this is purely academic. I do not believe that we will see in any foreseeable future a CFC made of clubs in which CFC membership is mandatory for all club members. I do not believe that the Provincial Associations will let the clubs choose the Governors because after that, those Association would be far less powerful.
I'm not sure even all the executive have seen the actual contract ( which someone told me runs to about 5 pages, and some one else told be is composed of some e-mails back and forth ). The governors have never even been shown the contract on a confidential basis.
Once I asked the President for a copy of the contract as a CFC Governor, and was told it was confidential between the executive and the outsourcing contractee. So I never got it.
Bob
Last edited by Bob Armstrong; Friday, 18th June, 2010, 01:34 PM.
Kevin, nothing stops you, for example, from advertising the RA club to your non-member friends and acquaintances. Why do you think the RA club has as many members as it does? To help you, I will give you a hint: start with Larry Bevand and draw the flowchart from there.
Individual club advertising policy, on a large scale, is really up to club executives, though I grant you word of mouth is useful for a club to aquire new members in spite of itself, i.e. in the face of a club Executive that isn't particularly proactive.
Since any large scale advertising of a club should include a phone number for inquiries, that phone number would be one of the club's Executive members, which emphasizes my point.
In the past I have pointed out that clubs often seem to neglect to make use of free or cheap large scale advertising, say on a local community channel bulletin board. Then again, perhaps at least some club Executive members are reluctant to give out their phone numbers as contacts, in case anyone calls at a late hour.
In my case, in the past I've thought about taking matters into my own hands, and advertising the RACC on the community channel, but I am reluctant to put my home phone number as a contact because I live with an older person who goes to sleep very early. Plus someone who calls might wonder why someone who isn't a club Executive person is given as the contact. At least I have in person told some newbies about the RACC myself, though they have yet to show.
Joining the RACC is a relatively expensive proposition for at least some people, so that's a possible barrier to the RACC gaining more members than it otherwise might. Then there's the fact that the RACC Prez, at least in the past year or so, liked to meet with potential new members to decide whether they were ready to play in a serious club. Particularly if they were very young juniors. You may object to clubs being serious (which you see as a barrier), but that's the way most RACC members seem to like it. The best solution may be to have semi-serious cafe-style clubs (besides serious clubs), but these may be reluctant (or at least not very proactive) to refer their members to serious clubs for fear they will not return to the cafe club.
In any case, there is now a new RACC Executive so I'll see what happens. Plus the size of the RACC isn't too bad as potential mega-clubs go: only a dozen more members or so are required to reach 100+, in spite of the apparent shortage of advertising and the seriousness of the club. I'm more concerned about the manifold other clubs across the country that have far weaker membership levels. The situation with the RACC is also atypical because of the presence of the CMA system in Ottawa, as you allude to. Then there's the large percentage of veteran players who joined during the Burgess years, or due to weekend events being held at the RA, on top of the CMA junior aspect of club memberships.
Anything that can go wrong will go wrong. Murphy's law, by Edward A. Murphy Jr., USAF, Aerospace Engineer
Tweet
.
Comment