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.
Family Hon Junior LIFE Adult Total
Quebec QC - 18 22 24 51 115
So 75 memberships are at risk according to the Jean Hebert's new doomsday scenario. Assuming he is half right as usual that means 37.5 or 38 people to give him the benefit of the doubt will not renew their CFC.
The FQE executive unanimously supported the agreement a couple of weeks ago. However, the representatives also had to support it. As Kerry pointed out, they support it, but with a few minor clarifications. They included the need for a player to take a membership from his territory (FQE for Quebec residents, CFC for Canadian residents). It was apparently the goal of the agreement, but was not clear enough. It should not change anything for the CFC governors, as the spirit and the result of the agreement is the same.
As Kerry showed though, if 15% of the FQE members wish a referendum, the FQE will hold one before September 30.
Thank you Felix, that is my understanding of recent developments. It is the same agreement in principle, just the wording cleaned up a bit. Nevertheless, it will need to go back to the CFC governors to be ratified.
Last edited by Bob Gillanders; Friday, 20th July, 2012, 03:57 PM.
Thank you Felix, that is my understanding of recent developments. It is the same agreement in principle, just the wording cleaned up a bit. Nevertheless, it will need to go back to the CFC governors to be ratified.
Unless there is some material change, I don't think the governors need to vote on it again. As I recall, there was talk of a living breathing arrangement with some of the specifics still waiting to be worked out.
I agree with Bob, this should go back for another vote. Just as future ammendments to the document should go back. If it is to be a living, breathing document the best way to handle that are ammendments agreed to by both parties.
At the Quebec Open, there will be a list to sign if an FQE member feels that there should be a referendum. I'm sure that most players there won't be aware of the whole story.
I agree with Bob, this should go back for another vote. Just as future ammendments to the document should go back. If it is to be a living, breathing document the best way to handle that are ammendments agreed to by both parties.
I think the executive should deal with minor variations in wording. They have been given a strong mandate from the governors. If there is any material change in the situation then the governors should vote again on the changed agreement but I don't think the job of the governors is to vote on every change in the contract. If that were the case then the governors should be more involved in the day to day changes in the contract which governs the ED. The governors should also be involved in any variances in the arrangements with respect to the newsletter. Those contracts are far more significant and material to the financial situation of the CFC than the contract with the FQE. I do not think that the governors should vote on the details of those contracts either but if we are going to vote on something that we need not vote on, those two contracts seem more relevant.
The FQE deal is more significant from the point of view of bringing Quebec to the table and the governors largely voted in favour of that idea.
There are some large issues on the table with respect to bringing the CFC into compliance with new laws governing non-profits. We should not waste too much time revisiting issues that have already been addressed.
I think the executive should deal with minor variations in wording. They have been given a strong mandate from the governors. If there is any material change in the situation then the governors should vote again on the changed agreement but I don't think the job of the governors is to vote on every change in the contract. If that were the case then the governors should be more involved in the day to day changes in the contract which governs the ED. The governors should also be involved in any variances in the arrangements with respect to the newsletter. Those contracts are far more significant and material to the financial situation of the CFC than the contract with the FQE. I do not think that the governors should vote on the details of those contracts either but if we are going to vote on something that we need not vote on, those two contracts seem more relevant.
The FQE deal is more significant from the point of view of bringing Quebec to the table and the governors largely voted in favour of that idea.
There are some large issues on the table with respect to bringing the CFC into compliance with new laws governing non-profits. We should not waste too much time revisiting issues that have already been addressed.
The other contracts you mention such as the ED are routine. Guidelines have already been established and everyone is aware of how it is supposed to work. This is something new and definitely not routine and has been changed even before the ink has dried. Perhaps in future it will become so routine that what you suggest will be the case. However, right now in my opinion it is too soon to treat it at the non-governor level. It is still at the 'political' level if you well and definitely in the gestation stages.
That's why I agree with Bob. The agreement with the FQE is at the strategic level and as such it should require board approval ie the governor's. If this was done on any of the non-profit boards I have served on this would definitely be board handled but turned over to the ED once it became day to day operational.
Last edited by Zeljko Kitich; Saturday, 21st July, 2012, 03:38 PM.
An amended agreement, whether the changes are minor or substantive, requires ratification by the Governors, in my opinion. Such a vote provides greater legitimacy to the arrangement.
An amended agreement, whether the changes are minor or substantive, requires ratification by the Governors, in my opinion. Such a vote provides greater legitimacy to the arrangement.
The Execs can take action in their hands, and postpone the Governors approval till the next annual meeting. (as I remember)
Tweet
Comment