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 the CFC could pledge just a part of that to the Closed, let say 2500$, finding an organizer would not be a problem. For one thing it would make finding other patrons somewhat easier. To convince others to support a national chess championship when our own Chess Federation of Canada is reluctant to do so is no easy task.
Jean: I think we will see something to that effect happening, soon.
Are you telling the members money for a new web site is no problem, but money for running the Canadian Championship is not possible?
Money for the web site (a capital asset) comes out of capital funds (left over from sale of the building).
Money for the Canadian Championship (a recurring expense) must be found in the Expense column.
When we debated the increase in price on the newsletter, I was one of the ones suggesting that that money could be used elsewhere, such as for example to help jumpstart the Closed. It's not that I'm anti-newsletter, but what is the right amount to spend on it is the question, really.
Chris, Since money seems to be such a large problem there are some initiatives which can be undertaken.
1. Discontinue the sale of life memberships. It appears the federation can not afford to give up the annual fees for the interest on the amount which goes into the foundation. The paid membership appears to be too small.
2. Determine how many life members have passed away. Take the lump sum payment from the foundation as the memberships no longer have to be sustained.
3. Remove the money from the sale of the building from the foundation. The money came from chess profits and should be going to the players and the programs.
.... What about other options for the CFC? For instance, could the CFC be further downsized to the point where only the most essential functions would be maintained (e.g. the liaison with FIDE, "keeper of the rules"/final arbiter of appeals, maintaining a website, calculating and maintaining the ratings systems, awarding national events to successful bidders, etc.) within a budget based on rating fees only (about $25-30k p.a.)? Membership fees could then be significantly reduced (say, $20 adult and $10 junior p.a.) with the money thus generated (another $25-30k p.a.?) being used to support special initiatives, which could include the Olympiad and the Closed.
....
the problem with that little story is that what the CFC does now is: (to quote you) "only the most essential functions ... (e.g. the liaison with FIDE, "keeper of the rules"/final arbiter of appeals, maintaining a website, calculating and maintaining the ratings systems, awarding national events to successful bidders, etc.) " but with the budget of rating fees + membership fees.
I mean, are you aware of anything else that the CFC does? (well, the email magazine at ~$10/person). Where does the money go? Beats me but as things currently are, they want the money from memberships and don't have money left over for significant support of the Olympiad team or Closed. I know the ratings fee is suppose to be revenue positive but the numbers don't really seem to add up do they?
Jean: I think we will see something to that effect happening, soon.
If there is still a chance for a Closed to be held in time in the next 2,5 months, even a barebone one, it has to happen very, very soon. Frankly I think that with a little bit of good will it could be organised in Montreal. This way Sambuev and I would not need lodging. :)
Gary you are just so wrong that I don't know where to start.
What do you expect for $36 per year, or in your case nothing?
What it appears you don't know is how to defend your position.
On the one hand you want the leftist socialist model of everyone paying so there is money for the programs and the good of chess.
Then the money gets squirreled away and on the other hand when it comes time for the programs you want the right wing model of paying for itself. The money is in the hands of the investors and not for chess. Seems no governor or executive to organize a Canadian Championship.
the problem with that little story is that what the CFC does now is: (to quote you) "only the most essential functions ... (e.g. the liaison with FIDE, "keeper of the rules"/final arbiter of appeals, maintaining a website, calculating and maintaining the ratings systems, awarding national events to successful bidders, etc.) " but with the budget of rating fees + membership fees.
I mean, are you aware of anything else that the CFC does? (well, the email magazine at ~$10/person). Where does the money go? Beats me but as things currently are, they want the money from memberships and don't have money left over for significant support of the Olympiad team or Closed. I know the ratings fee is suppose to be revenue positive but the numbers don't really seem to add up do they?
As I said in another post somewhere in this thread, CFC members need to make a decision on what kind of organization they want in future (within the applicable constraints, of course). You asked if I was aware of anything else the CFC does and the answer is: administrivia. We pay approx. $43k p.a. to Gerry Litchfield's co. to look after that administrivia (e.g. membership renewals, member inquiries, FIDE paperwork, bookkeeping, etc.). plus some portion of the things mentioned earlier. I'm not sure exactly how the work is divided between Gerry and the CFC's executives, but if CFC members want an organization that can provide, for example, significant funding to the Olympiad teams and the Canadian Closed in alternate years, then every bit of work the organization does needs to be examined to see if there is an alternative and less expensive way of getting the necessary jobs done.
One possibility (and I hate to even suggest this for fear of being laughed off the board) would be to have the governors chip in some more volunteer time to look after things like membership renewals. There are about 1,200 paying members. That's about 20 membership renewals per governor. Possible? Why not?
"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
As I said in another post somewhere in this thread, CFC members need to make a decision on what kind of organization they want in future (within the applicable constraints, of course). You asked if I was aware of anything else the CFC does and the answer is: administrivia. We pay approx. $43k p.a. to Gerry Litchfield's co. to look after that administrivia (e.g. membership renewals, member inquiries, FIDE paperwork, bookkeeping, etc.). plus some portion of the things mentioned earlier. I'm not sure exactly how the work is divided between Gerry and the CFC's executives, but if CFC members want an organization that can provide, for example, significant funding to the Olympiad teams and the Canadian Closed in alternate years, then every bit of work the organization does needs to be examined to see if there is an alternative and less expensive way of getting the necessary jobs done.
One possibility (and I hate to even suggest this for fear of being laughed off the board) would be to have the governors chip in some more volunteer time to look after things like membership renewals. There are about 1,200 paying members. That's about 20 membership renewals per governor. Possible? Why not?
You aren't telling me anything new. None of that stuff is a program that benefits chess. It's all overhead which might be OK if there was some left over for chess programs, but it seems that there isn't.
One possibility (and I hate to even suggest this for fear of being laughed off the board) would be to have the governors chip in some more volunteer time to look after things like membership renewals. There are about 1,200 paying members. That's about 20 membership renewals per governor. Possible? Why not?
Peter - The CFC is made up of lots of volunteers performing various jobs. Many of us, in addition to our duties at the CFC, help out at local clubs and weekend tournaments. All of this for absolutely no pay. What there does seem to be is endless criticism from the likes of Jean Hebert and now yourself, that we are not doing enough. I really do not think it is unreasonable to ask that the 1,200 paying members pony up enough in membership dues to pay for one administrative person.
Fortunately, I do realize that the vast majority of members appreciate the fact that their CFC membership is a great bargain. Expenses have already been cut to the bone, the answer is to raise membership dues by $10 each. That would give us $12,000 per year for additional program spending. :)
Peter - The CFC is made up of lots of volunteers performing various jobs. Many of us, in addition to our duties at the CFC, help out at local clubs and weekend tournaments. All of this for absolutely no pay. What there does seem to be is endless criticism from the likes of Jean Hebert and now yourself, that we are not doing enough. I really do not think it is unreasonable to ask that the 1,200 paying members pony up enough in membership dues to pay for one administrative person.
Fortunately, I do realize that the vast majority of members appreciate the fact that their CFC membership is a great bargain. Expenses have already been cut to the bone, the answer is to raise membership dues by $10 each. That would give us $12,000 per year for additional program spending. :)
Hi Bob;
I'd pay $50 but not $53 if I knew that my $7.00 was to used for Olympic fund and Cdn Closed but I really doubt that your executive could do that without rewritting the Handbook.
It is easier for us to believe that our membership means something but in reality it means nothing as we still have to pay our own rating fees.
Peter - The CFC is made up of lots of volunteers performing various jobs. Many of us, in addition to our duties at the CFC, help out at local clubs and weekend tournaments. All of this for absolutely no pay. What there does seem to be is endless criticism from the likes of Jean Hebert and now yourself, that we are not doing enough. I really do not think it is unreasonable to ask that the 1,200 paying members pony up enough in membership dues to pay for one administrative person.
Fortunately, I do realize that the vast majority of members appreciate the fact that their CFC membership is a great bargain. Expenses have already been cut to the bone, the answer is to raise membership dues by $10 each. That would give us $12,000 per year for additional program spending. :)
Relax, Bob. I'm in favour of increasing membership dues as evidenced by a post of mine from further up the page (to which you responded favourably, by the way). See: http://www.chesstalk.info/forum/show...34104#poststop
Roger Patterson then indicated that he didn't like the idea of increasing dues so I tossed out another idea for discussion (which Roger didn't like either). I'm not trying to slam governors and I don't believe I said anything negative about them in my responses to Roger.
Sheesh !!
p.s. The $10 p.a. dues increase is fine with me. In fact, I think it should be more.
p.p.s. You know, if the members aren't careful here they're going to "cheap" themselves right out of a national organization. If you want something then you need to be willing to pay for it. The question is, what do CFC members want? I'd like to see an organization that makes a bigger commitment to supporting excellence. Those governors you mentioned, Bob, need to be out there, in their clubs, playing in tournaments, etc., and talking to the members about what kind of organization they want. There needs to be a consensus on this.
Last edited by Peter McKillop; Monday, 14th February, 2011, 10:47 AM.
"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
You aren't telling me anything new. None of that stuff is a program that benefits chess. It's all overhead which might be OK if there was some left over for chess programs, but it seems that there isn't.
I'm not looking for "new." I'm looking for workable. And of course what I proposed is not a program. It's a proposal to slash expenses still further through increased volunteer efforts with the resulting free cash flow being used to support chess programs.
"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