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.
I don't think that it is a requirement for the presidential candidate to be a governor. I think that they have to be a CFC member. The quoted rule just indicates that he has to step down as governor to become the president. Anyone who is certain that he or she will win the presidency probably shouldn't stand for governor.
It has been the tradition that an ordinary member can run for President.
But it is mostly a governor who gets elected ( if not always - don't know of a year when an ordinary member got elected; an ordinary member has seldom run - last was Neil James Frarey I think ). The governorship issue is merely a change in the nature of the governorship of an elected President. He is to be neutral between provinces as President, and Chair of the Assembly of Governors. So he changes to a Governor-at-Large from a Provincial Representative Governor, to encourage his neutrality. That's how I understand it.
I don't think that it is a requirement for the presidential candidate to be a governor. I think that they have to be a CFC member. The quoted rule just indicates that he has to step down as governor to become the president. Anyone who is certain that he or she will win the presidency probably shouldn't stand for governor.
Yes, the example from this past year is that Bob G got to choose a replacement Governor for himself. I'm not sure if the final decision was his or if he left it to the OCA.
If you are not a Governor and you win the presidential or any executive or officer race, you become a Governor if you weren't already one
wow, I was really worried when I first read your post, but now I see most of your discontent is aimed at the governors. What a relief.
I am happy you find sufficient reason to renew, ratings and SwissSys. Great, but what about the newsletter. Pretty good, isn't it?
Do you have to be a governor to run for President? I'm not sure, so I sent am email to Les Bunning. Let's get his opinion.
I agree it is better to have a President who is in touch with the typical member. If that is you, go ahead and run.
There is no declared candidate named Peter. You probably mean Pierre.
We have 60 governors. Pretty hard to lump them all in the same category. Some new blood would be great, everyone agrees. And yes, it is a challenge to get agreement from such a large group. Warm beer really sucks.
Cash cow? Yes we collect dues from members. Is that not reasonable? I'm not sure about your "own whims" comment. IMHO, it doesn't apply to the past year. If you disagree, please be specific. I would like to know.
The local reform school was one of my regular maintainance calls a number of years ago. It was in Bowmanville. It seems the facility had been used during World War II as a prison camp for prisoners they captured in Europe. Mostly officers, if I recall correctly.
They were treated so well many stayed in Canada after the war ended.
With the move to treat delinquents with kindness, the reform school was closed up and sold to some foreign government to be used as a school. The winter weather proved a problem and as far as I know that only lasted a few years. Now I read somewhere they want to turn the site into a new housing area.
Already two candidates for president, both experienced arbiters from Quebec. What more can one ask for ? :);) Historically when was the last time there were more than two candidates for the CFC presidency ? Or even more than one ? At this late time I would not be surprised if no other candidate would come forward.
Of course it is reassuring to know that the CFC cannot easily go any lower than it already has. However both of these candidates have the potential to exceed expectations and lead the CFC where it has never gone before.
On the plus side, if it turns out that a risky and/or poor choice of CFC President is made this year, and/or for any number of times in the years to come, and the CFC reaches a point that it actually has to be dissolved, the way would be clear of all serious obstacles for a well-restructured reborn CFC to rise from the ashes. At the moment it would seem there is too much inertia for this vital restructuring to occur.
Anything that can go wrong will go wrong. Murphy's law, by Edward A. Murphy Jr., USAF, Aerospace Engineer
On the plus side, if it turns out that a risky and/or poor choice of CFC President is made this year, and/or for any number of times in the years to come, and the CFC reaches a point that it actually has to be dissolved, the way would be clear of all serious obstacles for a well-restructured reborn CFC to rise from the ashes. At the moment it would seem there is too much inertia for this vital restructuring to occur.
Possible ways to reform/restructure the CFC have been much discussed. Should the CFC give more powers back to the Governors from the Executive? Is an Executive consisting of the present officer positions, plus one representative from each provincial association (and perhaps even less powers for the Governors) a good way to go? Does one-CFC-member-one-vote make sense?
It would seem that the structure the CFC has now, plus whatever reliance there is on the ever outdated CFC Handbook, make for an inefficient organization. A comprehensive change in structure, so long as it's contemporary, logical and viable (i.e. making the CFC more efficient), naturally need not be based upon what is deemed by anyone to be the 'one and only correct solution'. However as I wrote in my quoted post above, at the moment inertia seems to weigh against comprehensive change.
Anything that can go wrong will go wrong. Murphy's law, by Edward A. Murphy Jr., USAF, Aerospace Engineer
On the plus side, if it turns out that a risky and/or poor choice of CFC President is made this year, and/or for any number of times in the years to come, and the CFC reaches a point that it actually has to be dissolved, the way would be clear of all serious obstacles for a well-restructured reborn CFC to rise from the ashes. At the moment it would seem there is too much inertia for this vital restructuring to occur.
It is hard to imagine that the CFC could reach a point where it would have to be dissolved. If one wait for that to happen hoping to see a new restructured organisation, one is set to wait for a long long time.
It is hard to imagine that the CFC could reach a point where it would have to be dissolved. If one wait for that to happen hoping to see a new restructured organisation, one is set to wait for a long long time.
Unless I am mistaken, it was not so long ago that at least some previous CFC president(s) tried to take measures that, in the eyes of some/many Governors, would have all but wound down the CFC.
History may repeat itself, whether or not the actions of future CFC president(s) help to first contribute to other financial crisis(es) for the CFC similar (of necessity, in a smaller way) to the one that happened within the past decade.
Anything that can go wrong will go wrong. Murphy's law, by Edward A. Murphy Jr., USAF, Aerospace Engineer
It would seem that the structure the CFC has now, plus whatever reliance there is on the ever outdated CFC Handbook, make for an inefficient organization. A comprehensive change in structure, so long as it's contemporary, logical and viable (i.e. making the CFC more efficient), naturally need not be based upon what is deemed by anyone to be the 'one and only correct solution'. However as I wrote in my quoted post above, at the moment inertia seems to weigh against comprehensive change.
Rather than efficiency, we need to be concerned with effectiveness. You can be very efficient at what you do but if it is the wrong things, you won't be very effective.
Rather than efficiency, we need to be concerned with effectiveness. You can be very efficient at what you do but if it is the wrong things, you won't be very effective.
Yes, effectiveness is a prerequisite for efficiency. :)
I believe someone asked not so long ago whether the CFC was an efficient organization. I was just going with the flow. :)
Quibbling aside, my first and second posts are to do with the efficiency of the CFC's governing/administrative structure more than how effective the CFC is at providing services etc. That effectiveness may have a better chance of arising if comprehensive structural corrections are made, sooner or later. Preferably sooner, but at the moment it may be later (maybe as in never...).
Last edited by Kevin Pacey; Friday, 17th June, 2011, 08:34 PM.
Anything that can go wrong will go wrong. Murphy's law, by Edward A. Murphy Jr., USAF, Aerospace Engineer
Yes, effectiveness is a prerequisite for efficiency. :)
I believe someone asked not so long ago whether the CFC was an efficient organization. I was just going with the flow. :)
I didn't mean it as any criticism of your post just more of an observation based too much time spent reading from the various works of Peter F. Drucker including his 1990 work "Managing the Nonprofit Organization: Principles and Practices" which I have temporarily misplaced among my many piles of books.
I didn't mean it as any criticism of your post just more of an observation based too much time spent reading from the various works of Peter F. Drucker including his 1990 work "Managing the Nonprofit Organization: Principles and Practices" which I have temporarily misplaced among my many piles of books.
Fair enough.
A nice, immediate, side effect of any CFC structural reform might be that a sudden infusion of fresh blood into the organization may occur, as a result of people becoming more enthusiastic about joining what they think promises to be a more effective :) organization in the future. Right now the CFC is undermanned, which makes it less effective, aside from what having an inefficient structure does to its effectiveness. :)
On a seperate topic, would you be the same Vlad (Drkulec?) whom I remember seeing play in the 1976 Canadian Open in Toronto, e.g. against GM Peter Biyasis (an upset draw)? If you are, I remember you seemed to play some pretty wild chess, at least back then. :)
Anything that can go wrong will go wrong. Murphy's law, by Edward A. Murphy Jr., USAF, Aerospace Engineer
Hi Bob G.
Sure I'd run as President but I don't think my ideas would be liked by the dinosaur Governors. I would not want to disrupt their couch potato positions.
Yes the handbook needs to updated, but updated how?
The governors have had decades to fine tune it but we still have complaints on who should be on the Olympic teams, who should play in the CDN closed who should play in the CDN junior. Where is the funding for these players to be found etc.
Jean Herbert is correct the CFC does not help its elite players correctly.
Why can't the CFC set up an elite tournament with Fide GM's and get us back to a zonal Candidate country.
Hey we had world championships in Montreal. Candidates in BC and New Brunswick where is this support now? What is the CFC doing? I believe nothing to bring us back up in status.
As for newsletter it has great articles but there is little local content.
I tried to bring in some local content but it was printed incorrectly and when I informed the editor he said mistakes happen but he did not post a correction in the next issue. He also took a post I made on this site and used it without asking me. So no the news letter is not my ball of wax it tells me that it is not interested in local events and if we do submit one then don't worry if it is incorrect you gotta live with it as we don't care what you send in. It does not support the real supporters of OTB chess, the local players. Most Elites get free or reduced entries but us low common players get to foot the bills. I think the picture is wrong because without us low common players, the organizers cannot pay the expenses let alone the prizes not to mention they gotta pay the janitors to clean up after the messy chess players.
I don't think I've ever seen a bunch of more inconsiderate people than chess players. They think the organizers should clean up their mess and make sure all sites are ideal but the organizers don't bring the garbage the chess players do,
Respect is a two way street. If you want some then show it when you play at chess events. The tables are clear when you arrive so leave them clear when you leave. Elite and common players are both at fault here.
I would have no platform except that without OTB chess players paying membership dues the CFC will fold. So we have to drum up ideas to keep the current membership,bring in new ideas that will attract new members and keep them interested in the CFC programs,and try and bring back old lost members by asking them why they don;t like what the CFC did to send them away and what we can do to bring them back. Give everyone a reason to support the CFC . A newsletter won't cut the cheese maybe cutting some of the dead wood Governors off the CFC tree of life might do the trick.
A plant grows from a seed or cuttings and grows strong with a strong earth foundation,it blooms with correct watering and care. It will wilt and die with neglect.Right now the CFC is neglecting it's membership so will it wilt and die????
As for attending the AGM. I think it is in the mornings and being a common chess player I have to work . I don't get the advantage of time off to attend.
Last edited by John Brown; Saturday, 18th June, 2011, 09:08 PM.
Reason: Forgot AGM question
Tweet
Comment