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.
In practice TDs on the ground are going CFC=FQE. The finer points on this are simply lost on us.
In practice the points raised in this debate have little practical significance for working TDs. If you are a CFC member you pop up in the CFC membership database that we download and use with Swiss Sys.
How can I check for FQE memberships when you register for my tournament? Do these folks carry an FQE card?
Can the CFC database file include the FQE guys as members?
I work at the FQE, I rate FQE tournaments and I mail FQE membership cards. But most of all, I like to keep things simple. Obviously, it is not practical for a CFC organizer to check FQE memberships, and even less to sell them. And it would not be practical for me to process a FQE membership bought in a another province, since the CFC organizer who collected the money does not know the FQE and will have absolutely no idea of what to do next. So why do it? When a Quebec player shows up at your tournament, if he can show his FQE membership card, fine! If not, let him play anyway, in all likelihood he will renew his FQE membership when he will play in his next FQE tournament in Quebec.
You know, the CFC-FQE agreement is a goodwill agreement. It will never work if we introduce numerous complications in the process. A Quebec player shows up at your tournament? Do not bother if he is a FQE member or not, just let him play without having to pay for a CFC membership. Simple, so simple!
This might sound plausible, but in practice onsite, with no internet access, it proves more difficult. I have sent some proposals to Michael and Richard, essentially hoping for some kind of automatic merger of current FQE members into the Swiss Sys DB file! :)
I work at the FQE, I rate FQE tournaments and I mail FQE membership cards. But most of all, I like to keep things simple. Obviously, it is not practical for a CFC organizer to check FQE memberships, and even less to sell them. And it would not be practical for me to process a FQE membership bought in a another province, since the CFC organizer who collected the money does not know the FQE and will have absolutely no idea of what to do next. So why do it? When a Quebec player shows up at your tournament, if he can show his FQE membership card, fine! If not, let him play anyway, in all likelihood he will renew his FQE membership when he will play in his next FQE tournament in Quebec.
You know, the CFC-FQE agreement is a goodwill agreement. It will never work if we introduce numerous complications in the process. A Quebec player shows up at your tournament? Do not bother if he is a FQE member or not, just let him play without having to pay for a CFC membership. Simple, so simple!
I work at the FQE, I rate FQE tournaments and I mail FQE membership cards. But most of all, I like to keep things simple. Obviously, it is not practical for a CFC organizer to check FQE memberships, and even less to sell them. And it would not be practical for me to process a FQE membership bought in a another province, since the CFC organizer who collected the money does not know the FQE and will have absolutely no idea of what to do next. So why do it? When a Quebec player shows up at your tournament, if he can show his FQE membership card, fine! If not, let him play anyway, in all likelihood he will renew his FQE membership when he will play in his next FQE tournament in Quebec.
You know, the CFC-FQE agreement is a goodwill agreement. It will never work if we introduce numerous complications in the process. A Quebec player shows up at your tournament? Do not bother if he is a FQE member or not, just let him play without having to pay for a CFC membership. Simple, so simple!
I commend you for your faith in human nature!
I suspect that there are several CFC tournament organizers who can recount how many times they let someone play because they claimed "they just rejoined the CFC" or "they were going to do so as soon as they get home" and then the organizer was stuck big time when the tournament is submitted for rating and (surprise) several people are not members.
In this day an age, it should NOT be a problem to prove membership (by being on a downloadable list with expiry dates) or pay on the spot...
By the way: do you rate FQE events that include people who are not members? If not, how long is the event rating delayed waiting to sort out the membership payment(s)?
By the way: do you rate FQE events that include people who are not members? If not, how long is the event rating delayed waiting to sort out the membership payment(s)?
Yes, I rate FQE events even when they include people who are not members. What I do is to send a bill to the organizer, asking him to pay for all FQE memberships that he forgot to collect. If the organizer does not comply, he will not be allowed to organize a FQE-rated tournament anymore.
But for non-FQE events held in Ontario or elsewhere, things are completely different. If a player calls me at the FQE and claims that he paid his FQE membership to some CFC organizer I never heard of, how will I get the money? It would be an incredible waste of time and energy to try to solve all kinds of problems that may crop up. This is why I suggest that CFC organizers should not be asked to check or collect FQE memberships.
And anyway, think about it. Let's suppose for a moment that a Quebec player plays in a CFC event without being a FQE member. Why should I care? Do you really believe that I should go every day on the CFC website, print all CFC newly rated events and check for Quebec players who played without being FQE members? Do you think I have time for this?
Yes, I rate FQE events even when they include people who are not members. What I do is to send a bill to the organizer, asking him to pay for all FQE memberships that he forgot to collect. If the organizer does not comply, he will not be allowed to organize a FQE-rated tournament anymore.
But for non-FQE events held in Ontario or elsewhere, things are completely different. If a player calls me at the FQE and claims that he paid his FQE membership to some CFC organizer I never heard of, how will I get the money? It would be an incredible waste of time and energy to try to solve all kinds of problems that may crop up. This is why I suggest that CFC organizers should not be asked to check or collect FQE memberships.
And anyway, think about it. Let's suppose for a moment that a Quebec player plays in a CFC event without being a FQE member. Why should I care? Do you really believe that I should go every day on the CFC website, print all CFC newly rated events and check for Quebec players who played without being FQE members? Do you think I have time for this?
And this right here is why the whole "agreement" makes absolutely no sense. It would be much simpler to abolish the FQE and stick with a national organization for ratings - but that would make life far too simple for everyone and, as usual, Quebec has to be "special".
And this right here is why the whole "agreement" makes absolutely no sense. It would be much simpler to abolish the FQE and stick with a national organization for ratings - but that would make life far too simple for everyone and, as usual, Quebec has to be "special".
Hopefully that is where we are headed, via baby steps.
EDIT: I misread Matthew's post as "It would be much simpler to abolish the FQE ratings and stick with a national organization for ratings ..." so please take my post in that context.
Last edited by Christopher Mallon; Monday, 3rd September, 2012, 07:14 AM.
It would be much simpler to abolish the FQE and stick with a national organization for ratings - but that would make life far too simple for everyone and, as usual, Quebec has to be "special".
Hopefully that is where we are headed, via baby steps.
Mr. Mallon
You are a CFC governor, aren't you? So you want to abolish the FQE. Hmmm... Are you really serious? Are you speaking on behalf of the CFC? Do you realize how triumphant will be our good friend Jean Hebert when he will read this?
Hopefully that is where we are headed, via baby steps.
I'm just not convinced that it works to take little steps when one party views it as a step towards amalgamation and another views it as a step towards recognizing fundamentally different yet equal.
Of course, in a micro-chasm, this is the history of English Canada and French Canada relations over the past fifty years. I do look forward to the upcoming governance of Quebec though being a separatist party once more. It will be fantastically interesting to see the interplay between the Federal Conservative's desire to appease the P.Q. and not simultaneously alienate their Western base. Sadly, though, my observation digress from the topic of this thread, which was... Oh right, entitlement and special privileges.
You are a CFC governor, aren't you? So you want to abolish the FQE. Hmmm... Are you really serious? Are you speaking on behalf of the CFC? Do you realize how triumphant will be our good friend Jean Hebert when he will read this?
Probablement excité à la perspective d'avoir à se lamenter à encore autre imaginaire l'injustice envers le Québec. On est surpris qu'il n'ait rien de mieux à faire avec son temps.
Last edited by Matthew Scott; Monday, 3rd September, 2012, 12:23 AM.
You are a CFC governor, aren't you? So you want to abolish the FQE. Hmmm... Are you really serious? Are you speaking on behalf of the CFC? Do you realize how triumphant will be our good friend Jean Hebert when he will read this?
Louis,
I also cringed at Mr. Mallon's comments. Chris is one of approximately 60 governors, no one governor speaks on behalf of the CFC.
You are a CFC governor, aren't you? So you want to abolish the FQE. Hmmm... Are you really serious? Are you speaking on behalf of the CFC? Do you realize how triumphant will be our good friend Jean Hebert when he will read this?
I'm sorry, I misread it as "abolish the FQE ratings" not "abolish the FQE" - since the whole thread is talking about ratings and memberships, and he follows that up with "stick with a national organization for ratings" ...
So to recap: Yes we should head towards a single national rating system, No I don't think the FQE needs abolishing.
Probablement excité à la perspective d'avoir à se lamenter à encore autre imaginaire l'injustice envers le Québec. On est surpris qu'il n'ait rien de mieux à faire avec son temps.
Especially with the big election tomorrow... after all if Quebec *were* to separate then he'd get the FQE-FIDE affiliation that he wants!
Not that I think Quebec will ever actually separate, at least not in the near future. I've heard some interesting stories about what some people had planned for the day after the 1995 referendum in the case of a victory by the separatists...
Especially with the big election tomorrow... after all if Quebec *were* to separate then he'd get the FQE-FIDE affiliation that he wants!
Not that I think Quebec will ever actually separate, at least not in the near future. I've heard some interesting stories about what some people had planned for the day after the 1995 referendum in the case of a victory by the separatists...
Reminds me of a Quebec comedian once remarking:
Man, I sure hope Quebec separates, I can't stand another one of these Canadian winters.
I'm sorry, I misread it as "abolish the FQE ratings" not "abolish the FQE" - since the whole thread is talking about ratings and memberships, and he follows that up with "stick with a national organization for ratings" ...
So to recap: Yes we should head towards a single national rating system, No I don't think the FQE needs abolishing.
Abolishing the FQE would now mean a serious loss a revenue for the CFC... don't do that :). Just cripple it enough (well under way...) so that it becomes meaningless (without ratings or relevance), but keep it wriggling so that it continues to deliver some $$$. ;)
Tweet
Comment