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.
They have a nice ring about them - is it the GTCL AGM next Spring for the 2 of you?????
Bob
I think Alex has made an excellent point. Being a governor of an organization like the CFC (or similarly being a member of the executive) is a responsibility that takes time and energy. Out of the pool of CFC members, there may not be 60 people who can really throw themselves at it to the extent that is required. It may well be that many potential good governors have been burned out and disillusioned by previous experiences.
Maybe restricting the number of governors to a smaller number of really committed people would be better. The CFC has suffered through some difficult times over the past few years and there's a lot of work to do. Work that I think requires energy and commitment. It is no small job and maybe you'd have to be a bit crazy to take it on.
I volunteer my time in a number of ways to chess and other things but I'm very careful not to over commit. If I'm going to volunteer in some capacity, I want to do a good job. Right now my life is more than full and consequently you won't be seeing any Governor Karpik.:)
Re: Bid Conflict of Interest & President's Voting
Other than the circus-like atmosphere of not being able to count or check emails properly, it would seem evident that Gillanders should NOT have voted, and then only after a tie decided in favour of RH. Double jeapordy?
There is the wonderful technical question of whether the Chair initially has NO VOTE, and only gets one if there is a tie OR whether the Chair initially HAS a vote, but MUST abstain. Then in the case of a tie, he gets a SECOND tie-breaking vote.
Which do you think is the case? What do others think? Anyone know how Robert's Rules of Order handles it?
I do not participate in such meetings, thus am not 'booked up' on RR's.
But either way, Pres Bob should not have a vote that counted in the initial, or non-tie-breaking procedure.
Just for the record - it wouldn't have made a difference.
If Bob G didn't vote for or against the first time, the vote would have been tied 14-14. Then Bob G would have had the tie-breaking vote, and he would have voted for Richmond Hill ( as he did vote ). So RH would have won anyway.
Still the the point is important for future votes, where it might make a difference.
I do not participate in such meetings, thus am not 'booked up' on RR's.
But either way, Pres Bob should not have a vote that counted in the initial, or non-tie-breaking procedure.
I was reviewing a number of RRO interpretation and FAQ sites yesterday.
First off, it is clear that organizations can adopt their own variations on these rules.
Secondly, it is also clear the handbook needs to be updated to account for all circumstances.
In the normal RRO, the Chair will only vote if it makes a difference, so for example to break a tie vote or to make a tie (and thus defeat an ordinary motion).
What's not clear is what happens when the vote is a choice between tournament bids or people in an election, if the President can then vote to make a tie. There is no discussion of this.
Maybe this issue is one for the Procedures' Committee ( myself, Chair, & CFC President, Bob Gillanders ) to look into, with consultation of a few others? We could try to draft some key Handbook amendments to clear all this up.
I was reviewing a number of RRO interpretation and FAQ sites yesterday.
First off, it is clear that organizations can adopt their own variations on these rules.
Secondly, it is also clear the handbook needs to be updated to account for all circumstances.
Let's keep it simple. Did any of the officers, either positions as listed in the bylaws or listed on the CFC web site as officers or other officers (they are all officers) have an interest in any of the bids and vote on the bids or discuss the bids?
Let's keep it simple. Did any of the officers, either positions as listed in the bylaws or listed on the CFC web site as officers or other officers (they are all officers) have an interest in any of the bids and vote on the bids or discuss the bids? ...
Gary, you're absolutely right to be concerned about this alleged conflict of interest. Given past CFC history, I don't think you'll get very far with your questions though. The people you're talking to you either don't get it, or they're determined to pretend they don't get it.
Let's get serious, folks. Does the CFC handbook really have to cover all possible conflict of interest situations (impossible, of course) in order for the governors and executives to be able to identify an obvious conflict of interest situation and act ethically. Does the CFC handbook have to have rules covering all possible unethical &/or illegal behaviours in order for the organization to behave ethically and legally? If the handbook doesn't mention embezzlement, is it OK for the Treasurer to siphon off some CFC cash for his own use?
It has been alleged that one or more persons who had a conflict of interest relative to the winning CYCC bid skewed the vote results by not declaring their conflict(s) of interest and abstaining from voting. Is this allegation true or not true? Is the CFC doing anything about this other than humming and hawing about the handbook and RRO?
"We hang the petty thieves and appoint the great ones to public office." - Aesop
"Only the dead have seen the end of war." - Plato
"If once a man indulges himself in murder, very soon he comes to think little of robbing; and from robbing he comes next to drinking and Sabbath-breaking, and from that to incivility and procrastination." - Thomas De Quincey
Gary, you're absolutely right to be concerned about this alleged conflict of interest. Given past CFC history, I don't think you'll get very far with your questions though. The people you're talking to you either don't get it, or they're determined to pretend they don't get it.
Let's get serious, folks. Does the CFC handbook really have to cover all possible conflict of interest situations (impossible, of course) in order for the governors and executives to be able to identify an obvious conflict of interest situation and act ethically. Does the CFC handbook have to have rules covering all possible unethical &/or illegal behaviours in order for the organization to behave ethically and legally? If the handbook doesn't mention embezzlement, is it OK for the Treasurer to siphon off some CFC cash for his own use?
It has been alleged that one or more persons who had a conflict of interest relative to the winning CYCC bid skewed the vote results by not declaring their conflict(s) of interest and abstaining from voting. Is this allegation true or not true? Is the CFC doing anything about this other than humming and hawing about the handbook and RRO?
I don't see what the issue is. So someone may have been associated with a bid and voted for it. So what?
And as has been noted, penalizing bidders who associate with one of the governers (any of the 60!) by depriving them of that vote does note seem productive.
CFC Officer Conflict of Interest in 2011 CYCC Bid Vote
Hi Peter:
You and Gary are raising legitimate questions.
I trust that in the first place, it is for the Executive to answer you, and not that of an ordinary governor, who will just be giving his own best personal opinion.
The CFC Handbook deals with conflict of interest only when it comes to the Board of Directors.
We have had several cases this year where Executive members have abstained on Executive votes because of conflict of interest.
I think all Governors can vote for tournament bids (including their own) and elections (for themselves). Conflict of interest would occur if they were to receive financial compensation for being a TD, for example.
I am not making any comment on this issue because I do not know enough about it, BUT, it has long been accepted that not only should there be no "conflict of interest" but there should also not even be "An Appearance of Conflict of Interest."
I don't see what the issue is. So someone may have been associated with a bid and voted for it. So what? ...
Roger, please consider this hypothetical situation: if you and some friends worked hard to put together a worthy bid (i.e. worthy of fair consideration) to host the CYCC in Victoria, and if your bid was subsequently turned down by the CFC after being defeated by the narrowest of margins by a competing bid, and if you then found out that 2 or more of the people who used their votes to scuttle your bid were closely associated with the competing bid (for example, part of the competitor's organizing committee), would you not at the very least feel that you'd been treated unfairly? Shouldn't any party who bids for the right to host an event tendered by the CFC be entitled to the minimum expectation that the CFC will make its decision in a fair and impartial manner? You really don't see what the issue is? "So what?" ??? An allegation has been made which casts a shadow on the integrity of the CFC. If the allegation is not true, then the CFC should publicly say so. If there is truth to the allegation, then the CFC needs to do something, quickly, to put the matter right.
And as has been noted, penalizing bidders who associate with one of the governers (any of the 60!) by depriving them of that vote does note seem productive.
I'm not sure what you're talking about here. It doesn't seem to be in response to anything I wrote.
Last edited by Peter McKillop; Friday, 26th November, 2010, 10:01 PM.
"We hang the petty thieves and appoint the great ones to public office." - Aesop
"Only the dead have seen the end of war." - Plato
"If once a man indulges himself in murder, very soon he comes to think little of robbing; and from robbing he comes next to drinking and Sabbath-breaking, and from that to incivility and procrastination." - Thomas De Quincey
Last edited by Peter McKillop; Friday, 26th November, 2010, 11:55 PM.
Reason: Oops!! Thanks for the heads up on my spelling blunder, Ken. Ed Seedhouse would have been all over this one. :)
"We hang the petty thieves and appoint the great ones to public office." - Aesop
"Only the dead have seen the end of war." - Plato
"If once a man indulges himself in murder, very soon he comes to think little of robbing; and from robbing he comes next to drinking and Sabbath-breaking, and from that to incivility and procrastination." - Thomas De Quincey
Tweet
Comment