CFC Executive - Candidates for 2011-12 ( July AGM Elections )

[Kerry Liles]

Re: CFC Executive - Candidates for 2011-12 ( July AGM Elections )

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kevin Pacey
"About what?

OK, it's now not about war, it's about business. The CMA has little to gain from making a substantial arrangement with the CFC, afaik."

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kerry Liles
"That is likely something Larry should decide - if anyone ever asks him!!"

I recall at least one attempt at an arrangement being made years ago. The deal fell through and, as is often the case in failed negotiations, both sides indicated either publicly or privately that the other side had caused the collapse.

Well, that was then... The CMA doesn't have a mortgage now (in Montreal at least) so he might be more easily tricked now. However, I am not holding my breath waiting for the CFC to approach either CMA or FQE.

[Kevin Pacey]

Re: CFC Executive - Candidates for 2011-12 ( July AGM Elections )

Well, that was then... The CMA doesn't have a mortgage now (in Montreal at least) so he might be more easily tricked now. However, I am not holding my breath waiting for the CFC to approach either CMA or FQE.

Like I wrote much earlier, the CFC's bargaining position is far worse these days.

[Fred McKim]

Re: Is Canadian Chess Failing?

If all this happened then perhaps more people might want to be involved with the CFC, e.g. as Governors?!

I think streamlining has been attempted in recent years, but failed. Perhaps even the normally inactive ones of the assembly of Governors didn't want to vote themselves out of office.

Like I wrote earlier, tough changes are normally heavily resisted, at least within Canadian chess circles, even though the CFC apparently hasn't made much progress without making many of them. Perhaps the dogged persistence of the CCC or some such individuals will eventually win out. More likely a new generation will have to come along for there to be more hope for big change.



After the CFC was basically gutted financially not so long ago, it is no wonder that any of the past four presidents haven't been able to do all that much with what they have to work with, barring raiding the Foundation, which apparently is one mighty sacred cow. One of those presidents didn't seem to do much at all, but at least his reign only seemed to cost the CFC a year of any sort of 'significant progress', rather than costing it much money (for example).



If you want to have vision, you need time to plan and implement it, and a CFC president can only count on being in office for a year. The same is true for a committee of CFC Governors, so your opinion about committees seems rather moot.

Also, unlike the CMA, the CFC is a non-profit organization, which IMO reduces its chances of being ever as successful as say the CMA, as unlike the CFC Executive and Governors, the CMA staff are paid and thus likely are normally better motivated to 'produce'.

From the CMA web page:

"The Chess'n Math Association (CMA) is a non-profit organization with provincial coordinators dedicated to bringing the game of chess to schools across Canada. The organization was founded in 1985 and now has three offices, 20 full-time staff and over 100 qualified chess instructors. Using our own 9-level instructional program, we teach chess as an extra-curricular activity to over 10,000 youngsters every week. The CMA is larger than all the other Canadian chess organizations combined. We provide a host of services for youngsters and schools in this country and now, through this web site, around the World."

Larry, Executive Director of CMA has been on the job since day one, what 26 years ago ? However, as far as I know, financial statements of this group aren't made available to the public and no mention is made of the "official" Governing structure on the web site.

Things just aren't that "smooth" with us.

[Kevin Pacey]

Re: Is Canadian Chess Failing?

From the CMA web page:

"The Chess'n Math Association (CMA) is a non-profit organization with provincial coordinators dedicated to bringing the game of chess to schools across Canada. The organization was founded in 1985 and now has three offices, 20 full-time staff and over 100 qualified chess instructors. Using our own 9-level instructional program, we teach chess as an extra-curricular activity to over 10,000 youngsters every week. The CMA is larger than all the other Canadian chess organizations combined. We provide a host of services for youngsters and schools in this country and now, through this web site, around the World."

Larry, Executive Director of CMA has been on the job since day one, what 26 years ago ? However, as far as I know, financial statements of this group aren't made available to the public and no mention is made of the "official" Governing structure on the web site.

Things just aren't that "smooth" with us.

I had vaguely understood that the Strategy Games stores are rather like the for-profit half of Larry's business, which includes the CMA.

Too bad. If the CMA were for-profit, I was about to half-jokingly suggest that the CFC ask what it could do to get out of Larry's way, such as by inking a deal on Junior chess, and then he might have less qualms about his business sponsoring the CFC if asked.

I can't think of any sort of substantial collaboration between the CFC and the CMA that wouldn't involve some sort of business deal, so I'm not sure what Ken is hoping for in the way of such collaboration, if it is to be without concrete business negotiations.

[Fred McKim]

Re: Is Canadian Chess Failing?

I had vaguely understood that the Strategy Games stores are rather like the for-profit half of Larry's business, which includes the CMA.

Too bad. If the CMA were for-profit, I was about to half-jokingly suggest that the CFC ask what it could do to get out of Larry's way, such as by inking a deal on Junior chess, and then he might have less qualms about his business sponsoring the CFC if asked.

I can't think of any sort of substantial collaboration between the CFC and the CMA that wouldn't involve some sort of business deal, so I'm not sure what Ken is hoping for in the way of such collaboration, if it is to be without concrete business negotiations.

Over the years I have always been pro-CMA: organizing events and trying to counter the negative attitude of certain CFC Executive members especially back around 10-12 years ago.

I've been back on the Executive for about nine months, while I'd like to be as optimistic as Ken is regarding successful talks, it is 100% clear to me that CMA will only engage in joint operations that will benefit them, THUS we must always look for win-win scenarios. This is useful to know as it gives some idea what things might be of interest to Larry (holding NAYCC) and what wouldn't (helping run CYCC Qualifiers).

I have some thoughts on this, but have to go help wash dishes, then go to WalMart for something, watch the Canadiens, etc......

[John Brown]

Re: CFC Executive - Candidates for 2011-12 ( July AGM Elections )

So Besides Fred McKim and Robert Armstrong who else is applying for a position or standing
in the Motley Crew Of Misfits?

[Kerry Liles]

Re: CFC Executive - Candidates for 2011-12 ( July AGM Elections )

So Besides Fred McKim and Robert Armstrong who else is applying for a position or standing
in the Motley Crew Of Misfits?

I do not believe anyone else has declared yet (Bob Gillanders has stated that he will serve as past-president
- that is important because it is not always a "given"). At least one recent president declined to serve as a past-president...

[Fred McKim]

Re: CFC Executive - Candidates for 2011-12 ( July AGM Elections )

So Besides Fred McKim and Robert Armstrong who else is applying for a position or standing
in the Motley Crew Of Misfits?

None of the other 4 elected executive members (Barron, Bond, Craver, Dutton) have made public their intentions.

Personally I would think if they weren't running they'd have made that known by now.

Bob A's position is an Officer but not an Executive position.

[Ken Craft]

Re: CFC Executive - Candidates for 2011-12 ( July AGM Elections )

I believe the CFC and CMA could reach a win-win situation. Over my years as a Governor, the attitude of the CFC seems to have been the biggest impediment.

[Fred McKim]

Re: Is Canadian Chess Failing?

Over the years I have always been pro-CMA: organizing events and trying to counter the negative attitude of certain CFC Executive members especially back around 10-12 years ago.

I've been back on the Executive for about nine months, while I'd like to be as optimistic as Ken is regarding successful talks, it is 100% clear to me that CMA will only engage in joint operations that will benefit them, THUS we must always look for win-win scenarios. This is useful to know as it gives some idea what things might be of interest to Larry (holding NAYCC) and what wouldn't (helping run CYCC Qualifiers).

I have some thoughts on this, but have to go help wash dishes, then go to WalMart for something, watch the Canadiens, etc......

I am going to start a new thread to talk about CFC - CMA win-win scenarios.

[Kevin Pacey]

Re: Is Canadian Chess Failing?

I am going to start a new thread to talk about CFC - CMA win-win scenarios.

I thought you were joking about washing dishes etc. because you didn't want to publicly reveal possible future CFC-CMA negotiating points. :)

All negotiations are supposed to be win-win, as much as possible, if both sides bargain in good faith.

On the other hand, no one knows how the future will unfold, i.e. that it will in fact be win-win, so negotiation may often be based more on taking as much as each side can while giving away as little as each side can, all in the name of win-win. :)

I repeat, the CFC hasn't so much to 'give' these days.

[Paul Bonham]

Re: Is Canadian Chess Failing?

I thought you were joking about washing dishes etc. because you didn't want to publicly reveal possible future CFC-CMA negotiating points. :)

All negotiations are supposed to be win-win, as much as possible, if both sides bargain in good faith.

On the other hand, no one knows how the future will unfold, i.e. that it will in fact be win-win, so negotiation may often be based more on taking as much as each side can while giving away as little as each side can, all in the name of win-win. :)

I repeat, the CFC hasn't so much to 'give' these days.

I love the juxtaposition of the lines

"I repeat, the CFC hasn't so much to 'give' these days."

followed by the Einstein quote,

"Imagination is much more important than knowledge."

[Kevin Pacey]

Re: Is Canadian Chess Failing?

I love the juxtaposition of the lines

"I repeat, the CFC hasn't so much to 'give' these days."

followed by the Einstein quote,

"Imagination is much more important than knowledge."

I'm not sure, but I think the Einstein quote (my current chesstalk 'Signature') refered to intelligence, if not genius.

I adopted this 'Signature' partly to make people who think knowledge matters more than imagination think twice, at least when it comes to playing chess.

I'll admit I may not always have the greatest imagination, or knowledge for that matter, e.g. when it comes to the CFC. Who does? :)

[Paul Bonham]

Re: Is Canadian Chess Failing?

I'm not sure, but I think the Einstein quote (my current chesstalk 'Signature') refered to intelligence, if not genius.

I adopted this 'Signature' partly to make people who think knowledge matters more than imagination think twice, at least when it comes to playing chess.

I'll admit I may not always have the greatest imagination, or knowledge for that matter, e.g. when it comes to the CFC. Who does? :)

Kevin, everyone is capable of imagination, especially when we are (or in the case for most people, "were") children. What happens as we get older is that imagination gets blocked by the rigid rules and expectations of society.

If anyone that was in the business of organizing chess truly had Einstein-like imagination, they would realize that classical chess is just one of several variants that deserve to be organized worldwide and to be rated and to have people pursuing some kind of personal title. Each of these variants could make money, some perhaps more than others. Getting people to play these variants could start with children.

But you and I have been down that road before, and you seem to have your imagination blocked, which is to say you decided you don't like variants.

Interesting that on another recent thread, a few posters are raving about a game that exhibited extraordinary imagination within the confines of the rules of classical chess. Someone posted a link to the full game, and on that site, posters enthuse about the imagination of Serper, sacrificing virtually all (or maybe it was all) of his pieces.

Why can't anyone imagine such a type of game being the norm instead of the exception? Why are chess players worldwide limited to having to mine through thousands upon thousands of much more boring (but nevertheless useful in the aspect of teaching some minute technique) games to find the very few that exhilirate? Especially when all it takes is a little imagination to change everything.

Maybe while the CFC and CMA engage in "draw-draw" negotiations, someone will come along and make them both irrelevant simply by using some imagination.

[Kevin Pacey]

Re: CFC Executive - Candidates for 2011-12 ( July AGM Elections )

If diamonds were the norm for stones in nature, they'd be worthless.

I've played chess variants and oriental board games for fun and don't mind them for that purpose for the time being while classical chess is my focus.

I think some day a (single) chess variant will probably become the new norm instead of classical chess. However as you've alluded to I think we've already agreed to disagree that only one form of chess can ever dominate in terms of popularity.