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.
The deal still has to be ratified by the governors but hopefully it will be as we have been divided too long. Interesting is that this type of cooperation was a plank in the long term vision and it will be a fait accompli (if everything goes well with the governor approval) shortly after the ink on the long term strategic plan is dry.
Another plank is cooperation with the Chess and Math Association and since things seem to be coming to fruition maybe I should include something about a very large lottery win in there as well. :)
The FQE have some very big and exciting plans for chess and chess events in Quebec which will impact all of us if they can be successfully brought forward. I am looking forward to the CFC working with the FQE to bring these projects to reality.
Last edited by Vlad Drkulec; Friday, 22nd June, 2012, 02:39 PM.
The deal still has to be ratified by the governors but hopefully it will be as we have been divided too long.
The Governors would be crazy not to go along with it. This is financially a one-sided agreement in favor of the CFC. If the FQE pays 9$/year per adult member and 4$/junior member, it will amount to the FQE serving almost 10,000$ a year to the CFC for the sake of having a few events FIDE rated and a few other minor advantages! I knew the FQE had too much money for its own good, but not that much.
Of course such a "sponsorship" would solve the CFC's financial problems for a while. But even if this goes on and pass, in the long run many aspects of this agreement are quite difficult to implement and certain to provoke mountains of negociations and discussions...
The Governors would be crazy not to go along with it. This is financially a one-sided agreement in favor of the CFC. If the FQE pays 9$/year per adult member and 4$/junior member, it will amount to the FQE serving almost 10,000$ a year to the CFC for the sake of having a few events FIDE rated and a few other minor advantages! I knew the FQE had too much money for its own good, but not that much.
Of course such a "sponsorship" would solve the CFC's financial problems for a while. But even if this goes on and pass, in the long run many aspects of this agreement are quite difficult to implement and certain to provoke mountains of negociations and discussions...
"Annual fees collected are placed in a trust, earmarked for FIDE-related* expenses, overseen by 50% FQE Trustees and 50% CFC Trustees."
To me, it looks like the money that the FQE would pay to the CFC is to be used to offset the FIDE fees for FQE events... I don't know how those numbers (per person) were computed, but if they turn out to be too high or too low, I imagine they could be tweaked based on actual costs incurred?
Last edited by Kerry Liles; Friday, 22nd June, 2012, 04:05 PM.
Reason: fix quote
"Annual fees collected are placed in a trust, earmarked for FIDE-related* expenses, overseen by 50% FQE Trustees and 50% CFC Trustees."
To me, it looks like the money that the FQE would pay to the CFC is to be used to offset the FIDE fees for FQE events... I don't know how those numbers (per person) were computed, but if they turn out to be too high or too low, I imagine they could be tweaked based on actual costs incurred?
How are you interpreting that it is only FQE FIDE related expenses. It does not say that and the footnote indicates as examles events that would be both FQE/CFC such as Olympiads etc.
Guessing at interpretations is not very helpful at this stage. Annoucing the agreement before both parties have ratified it is also not particularly useful
"Annual fees collected are placed in a trust, earmarked for FIDE-related* expenses, overseen by 50% FQE Trustees and 50% CFC Trustees."
To me, it looks like the money that the FQE would pay to the CFC is to be used to offset the FIDE fees for FQE events... I don't know how those numbers (per person) were computed, but if they turn out to be too high or too low, I imagine they could be tweaked based on actual costs incurred?
Imagination does not count when it comes to interpret a written agreement. FIDE related expenses will mean anything loosely related to FIDE, including and first of all expenses of national teams going to olympiads. With a contribution of 10000$ a year, FQE members will end up paying for most of these expenses by themselves. As I said, governors, jump on it as fast as you can, unless you don't want it to appear too good to be true to the other party. You won't find a better deal anywhere.
Imagination does not count when it comes to interpret a written agreement. FIDE related expenses will mean anything loosely related to FIDE, including and first of all expenses of national teams going to olympiads. With a contribution of 10000$ a year, FQE members will end up paying for most of these expenses by themselves. As I said, governors, jump on it as fast as you can, unless you don't want it to appear too good to be true to the other party. You won't find a better deal anywhere.
Ok. I doubt that pdf file was the complete written agreement. I guess I'll wait to see what the actual agreement turns out to be. I am not a Governor (nor even a paid-up CFC member at this point) so I suppose more information will be forthcoming later - most likely after it has been agreed...
Shouldn't members be informed about it before it is ratified ? And discussed before it is ratified ?
Sure and maybe we should go full force on democracy and have a referendum where each FQE and CFC member gets to vote on it before it can be ratified. We should also hold online input forums at every stage of the CFC/FQE discussions. Hopefully we might have an agreement in place at the end of 5 years or more, but hey there will have been full public disclosure, thorough membership forums and extensive studies and counter proposals at every step of the way. I can think of at least a dozen ammendments and modifications to this agreement I could propose. And that's just me.
However, as you keep suggesting that it's a no-brainer and should be accepted by the CFC without delay I don't see why you want to slow the process down. The governors of the CFC are put in place to govern so let them get on with it.
If the membership starts developing a whole bunch of different interpretations of what it means that is not helpful to the process.
Last edited by Zeljko Kitich; Friday, 22nd June, 2012, 09:26 PM.
Imagination does not count when it comes to interpret a written agreement. FIDE related expenses will mean anything loosely related to FIDE, including and first of all expenses of national teams going to olympiads. With a contribution of 10000$ a year, FQE members will end up paying for most of these expenses by themselves. As I said, governors, jump on it as fast as you can, unless you don't want it to appear too good to be true to the other party. You won't find a better deal anywhere.
Does the FQE have honorary membership for titled players? My reading of the agreement is that if they do not, Quebec residents will have to be charged the FQE membership amount or more. That to avoid arbitrage.
"CFC will charge the same fees (or higher) to Quebec residents who would request membership in the CFC in order to avoid arbitrage."
The administration of the money will be 50 percent CFC and FQE administered. I don't understand how a tie would be broken.
Imagination does not count when it comes to interpret a written agreement. FIDE related expenses will mean anything loosely related to FIDE, including and first of all expenses of national teams going to olympiads. With a contribution of 10000$ a year, FQE members will end up paying for most of these expenses by themselves. As I said, governors, jump on it as fast as you can, unless you don't want it to appear too good to be true to the other party. You won't find a better deal anywhere.
Jean,
Would you like to tell us what a fair exchange of services between these two organizations would look like through your eyes?
Would you like to tell us what a fair exchange of services between these two organizations would look like through your eyes?
Larry
Larry,
Unfortunately it is too late for that. If my opinion had been seeked while this agreement was discussed, I would have been happy to give it and make "constructive" suggestions. Now I can only react to it, knowing that the people involved in that deal will defend every line of it to death. Overall, most measures make sense, but to put them all in the same basket at what appears to me to be a ridiculous price tag that will cripple the FQE and its members doesn't. This is not a "WIN-WIN deal", this is a CFC win and an FQE loss. And this is not the kind of agreement that lasts.
Kerry, I would like to thank you for your good words. On my side I would like to thank Michael von Keitz, without his willingness to take on the political risk associated with this agreement, this would have never happened. Gordon Ritchie also played a critical role by establishing the initial contacts between the two federations and by clearly sensing were the compromise lied. Thanks Gordon for taking the initiative. Hopefully this agreement will be ratified and this will start a new era in the relationships between the FQE and the CFC for the benefit of all chess players in the country.
What are these annual fees to FIDE exactly ? Would the CFC be happy with the FQE paying a per capita share of these (around 25%) in exchange to have normal access to FIDE ratings and a formula to recognize the FQE ratings (for national championships purposes) and give Quebec players equal chances ?
Jean Hébert
Taken from a thread Mr. Hébert wrote on March 3rd on this blog.
It appears to me that this agreement roughly follows the suggestion of Mr. Hébert...
Tweet
Comment