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.
Re: FIDE presidency: and the CFC's vote goes to...
Hi Jean:
The governors did vote at the AGM on this issue - they passed a motion that instructions to the FIDE Rep., Hal Bond, were to be given to him by the Executive ( rather than the governors voting on the issue ).
So, you are not going to get a governor vote on this issue now.
Re: FIDE presidency: and the CFC's vote goes to...
Hi Kerry:
Countries may be deciding to declare publicly their vote, for various reasons. But this doesn't mean there may not in fact be a secret ballot vote at the Congress. But I'm afraid I don't kow. Maybe the current, or one of the past FIDE reps, who were involved in elections, might let us know if it is secret.
Countries may be deciding to declare publicly their vote, for various reasons. But this doesn't mean there may not in fact be a secret ballot vote at the Congress. But I'm afraid I don't kow. Maybe the current, or one of the past FIDE reps, who were involved in elections, might let us know if it is secret.
Bob
I forgot this is FIDE... Hal confirmed in a separate thread that there is a secret ballot. So there are two issues: how should Canada APPEAR to vote and how should they REALLY vote? lol
Re: FIDE presidency: and the CFC's vote goes to...
Hal Bond, FIDE Rep., in another thread , has advised:
" Both the Presidential election and the Olympiad vote [ for 2014 ] will be secret ballots. "
So I guess, Canada could take the position that the ballot is secret, and so they do not have to take a public stand. Don't know if this will make the members very happy though, if the Executive chooses this option.
I forgot this is FIDE... Hal confirmed in a separate thread that there is a secret ballot. So there are two issues: how should Canada APPEAR to vote and how should they REALLY vote? lol
Send an open proxy (if it is allowed.) :D
How has the CFC voted (or acted) at least since 1994 (?)
The governors did vote at the AGM on this issue - they passed a motion that instructions to the FIDE Rep., Hal Bond, were to be given to him by the Executive ( rather than the governors voting on the issue ).
So, you are not going to get a governor vote on this issue now.
Hi Bob,
I was not talking "governor vote". I meant that since Karpov is not going to throw in the towel (in my opinion) there will be a vote for the FIDE presidency at the forthcoming olympiad. The CFC will have to vote then.
By the way it is quite surprising that a governor vote did not produce even a simple majority in favor of one of the candidates... What was the score exactly ?
Re: Re : Re: FIDE presidency: and the CFC's vote goes to...
Hi Jean H.:
Sorry, I replied to the wrong post - I was replying to Jean Sasserville's post a bit above. But I can say this:
It was treated as an in camera confidential discussion, not for the minutes. There was a straw vote taken, and I believe it is not to be made public - you can check with Bob Gillanders on that. But I think I can say there was no majority - it was divided between Karpov, Ilyumzhinov, abstain and some governors didn't vote at all ( and since it was based on the AGM discussion, it was felt that proxies would not be voted in the straw vote ). So it was really a very limited no. of governors giving their opinion. This was another reason it got deferred to the Executive. If you are looking for anything more, I'd have to suggest you contact Bob G., now the keeper of the keys !
Bob
Last edited by Bob Armstrong; Thursday, 22nd July, 2010, 05:29 PM.
Re: FIDE presidency: and the CFC's vote goes to...
Does anybody know the opinion of the leading Canadian players and main TDs/sponsors with regards to FIDE elections?
Does anybody know the opinion of top respectable players such Kramnik and Anand?
Re: FIDE presidency: and the CFC's vote goes to...
Bob,
My proxy gave instructions on whom to vote for. Was my proxy used in that straw vote? In the interests of transparency, I believe the Federation should support Karpov.
Re: FIDE presidency: and the CFC's vote goes to...
Hi Ken:
The instructions from the chair were to not vote proxies, because the proxy sender had not been privy to the debate on the floor, since it was only a straw vote.
The instructions from the chair were to not vote proxies, because the proxy sender had not been privy to the debate on the floor, since it was only a straw vote.
Bob
that doesn't sound procedurally correct at all, there is no requirment for proxies to hear the debate on the floor, there is nothing binding about that debate or special about that debate for that matter
Re: FIDE presidency: and the CFC's vote goes to...
general direction as in who to support or how to proceed with deciding who to support?
what instruction had the person who gave you the proxy given to you? if they supported a particular candidate and it came down to any kind of vote as to which candidate to support then personally I would have voted the proxy if instructed as to which candidate that person supported
if it came down to how do we proceed only, then I would agree with you
although I don't know why a vote would not be taken on which candidate people support, otherwise how else would someone making the decision down the line take into account the wishes of the membership if they don't know what those are? as I understood from Bob Armstrong's blog such a vote was taken
Last edited by Zeljko Kitich; Friday, 23rd July, 2010, 10:41 AM.
Re: FIDE presidency: and the CFC's vote goes to...
Hi Zeljko:
It was my understanding that the chair was callinig a vote on whom to support, only as a straw vote, to get a sense as to whether there was any kind of consensus ( and as I understood it, we were only to vote our own votes, not our proxies, even if specific instructions were given, because there had been lots of information put forward in debate about personal experiences with various slate candidates, and other valid points made for either side ) - I think his idea was that if not, then the matter would likely be referrred to the executive by the governors.
Had it come to a formal vote, Maurice, I'm sure, would have expected us to vote our proxies, despite them not hearing debate, as usual and as was done for all other votes taken.
Tweet
Comment