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.
15. Have fun!
(Thanks to Nigel Hanrahan for writing these up!)
Grassroots Group Proposes CFC Restructuring Package
Re: Grassroots Group Proposes CFC Restructuring Package
I am an Organizer/TD in Ottawa, Ontario, which is very close to Quebec. I can assure both Jason and Hugh that I strongly agree to NOT eliminate tournament memberships.
If anything, I would eliminate paid memberships, and consider using existing "rating fees".
Note of course that there is risk in doing that, as existing CFC members are well aware that they are probably losing their printed magazine, and that existing rating fees are already practically an order of magnitude greater than, for example, CMA and USCF rating fees. Therefore, there might be tremendous backlash to overly high CFC ones.
Re: Grassroots Group Proposes CFC Restructuring Package
I respectfully submit that people outside Quebec sometimes under-estimate just how much it pisses off many Quebec players that they have to pay ANYTHING extra to play in a non-FQE event, that the FQE and CFC do not have a reciprocal rating agreement.
I am basing this observation on living/playing in Montreal/Gatineau(Hull) for decades. However, if someone from Quebec (especially rated U2000) disagrees, please reply.
Re: Grassroots Group Proposes CFC Restructuring Package
It seems clear to me that eliminating the tournament membership has to be predicated on a very reduced CFC membership fee. I like Chris Mallon's idea of $10 junior and $15 adult as ballpark numbers. Another idea might be to have the rating fee tied into the membership fee: $15/adult/year plus $2/event rating fee or perhaps (say) $35/adult/year with no rating fee? Then very active players can do the math and decide which plan is best for them.
Of course, I do not really know how much overhead is involved in providing rating service, but Larry Bevand charges a lot less and handles quite the volume, so it must be possible...
It makes no sense to have a National/Provincial organization, run events that are within that organization's domain and then allow people to wander in and play without membership of some kind - that makes membership meaningless [back off on the jokes please]
Re: Grassroots Group Proposes CFC Restructuring Package
Well at least half the blame there lies with the FQE. But really, how would such an agreement benefit the CFC? All it would do is cost it a few members.
Sure there are some benefits for those members who live on the border with Quebec... but does that outweigh the drawbacks?
Re: Grassroots Group Proposes CFC Restructuring Package
I wouldn't want to get into creating multiple levels of membership - too complicated for everyone to keep track of. Plus we've already created a way for cheaper ratings fees if only the CFC will ever automate the system. Maybe next century? :)
Re: It's Going to the Governors - Grassroots CFC Restructuring Package
Our platform has stirred up a lot of contrary positions. We had hoped to generate this open and full debate.
But we fully intend to bring this platform to the governors for approval ! And we hope to do that next week, with drafted motions and Governor movers and seconders.
If you support an item in the platform, or violently disagree with it, we suggest that you immediately contact your local Governors, and let them know how you want them to vote on these 7 items. It is the Governors' call, and they are amenable to member lobbying.
In fact, the provincial organizations may want to call in their Governors to strategize how to vote on this platform, in the best interests of their province.
Lets carry forward this open and healthy debate, all the way to the Governors.
3. CFC Membership: CFC to eliminate tournament memberships – if you want to play in a CFC tournament, you must purchase an annual membership. To encourage individuals to become members, first time CFC members will be given a 40% fee reduction for their first year.
This is exactly what shouldn't happen. I was discussing this exact point with a friend of mine at the Keres Open. He only goes in this one tournament a year. I asked him what he would do if they eliminated the tournament fee and he had to buy a CFC membership and he said he would stop playing in CFC tournaments. This player also is has organized his own unrated invitational tournament which he easily filled up. All this proposal will do is reduce the amount of people who play in CFC tournaments.
People in Ontario might not think this is a problem, but here in BC there has been declining participation in OTB tournaments and this proposal would only make it worse.
If I had a vote in this I would vote for Bruce Harpers recommendation of getting rid of the CFC membership and only going with the rating fee.
J.Lohner
B.C. charges a mind boggling 12 dollars per member as a provincial fee the last time I looked. Even if you deduct the CFC 40% you'll still have to pay 21.60 for CFC plus 12.00 for BC federation for a total of 33.60.
A player in Ontario would pay the 21.60 plus 7.00 dollars for the Ontario Chess Association for a total of 27.60. See how much more you pay in B.C. than in Ontario and it's a made in B.C. problem.
The problem with getting rid of the CFC membership is there is no stated intention of getting rid of provincial fees. In fact, there is no reason to think the provinces wouldn't use that opportunity to increase the provincial take. You know, to promote chess in the province. :)
Regarding Ontario, the last time I looked it made up 50% if not slightly more of the total membership of the CFC and has only around 35% of the population of the country. B.C. has a much lower percentage and possibly the high provincial add on is part of the reason.
Re: Grassroots Group Proposes CFC Restructuring Package
In another activity in which I participate, there are no federation membership fees. A sum is usually taken from each entry fee and given to the national and/or provincial federation (sort of like rating fees). This sum may vary depending on whether it is a local, provicial, or national event. (entry fees range from nothing (sponsors cover everything) up to about $50 (for a national event). Cash prizes are rare - trophies are the norm.)
The "national office" is run from someone's home, and virtually all communication is done via email and the Internet (and boards similar to Chesstalk). However - we are talking about a federation that is smaller than the CFC - under 1,000 members.
Re: Grassroots Group Proposes CFC Restructuring Package
actually I do know - everytime I play in the US, at most one tournament a year, it (as you say) pisses me off that I need to buy a full USCF membership for a membership, magazine, and rating that I have no interest in.
1. We originally garnered 18 endorsers for our initial platform that we released publicly on June 15.
2. Our platform generated much debate on both ChessTalk websites and the " dark " Ottawa Chess Club Board - over 1000 views in about 3 days. Many contrary positions were taken.
2. By June 18, we had 5 Governors agreeing to move and second 5 of the 7 items in the platform.
3. Currently our Item # 5 ( Retail Business ) and # 7 ( CFC Staffing )are undergoing some amendment in order for us to conscript Governor movers/seconders for them as well. We anticipate that the amended items will keep the basic spirit of the original platform , and will raise thses items for Governor debate, the same as the original versions were intended to do. It is better to have them moved/seconded by Governors in a revised form, than stubbornly stick with the original version, and not be able to send them on at all.
4. If we can get all this done by Monday night,June 23, then we will send off 7 motions and a “ Backgrounder “ document, to Lyle Craver, CFC Secretary, at midnight, Monday, June 23. We will have done our part. After that it will be out of our hands. It will be up to the Executive to place it for an e-mail discussion/vote, before the AGM, and the Governors to decide the 7 items !
I want to thank all the 18 endorsers of the platform, and the mover/seconder Governors, for helping us move this campaign through to a good conclusion. We still have the last lap to go, but it is looking good.
Re: Grassroots Group Proposes CFC Restructuring Package
"It makes no sense to have a National/Provincial organization, run events that are within that organization's domain and then allow people to wander in and play without membership of some kind - that makes membership meaningless [back off on the jokes please]"
I assume the joke is that CFC membership is meaningless, but that's hardly a joke.
It seems to me that the worst solution of all is to reduce membership fees to $10 or $15. You would have all the expensive overhead of administering memberships with less return.
I don't follow the argument that the CFC rating fees are too high. If there was no CFC membership fee, so that anyone could play in a rated tournament, then the rating fee (which I think is $3 per event at the moment) is pretty nominal, and if more rated events were held with more participants (which would pretty clearly be the case, judging from the posts we're seeing), then the result would be:
a. Revenue from memberships would disappear (it is declining anyway, and will decline more when the magazine disappears).
b. Overhead for administering membeships would disappear.
c. Revenue from rating fees would go up.
I also favour rating other types of events (active, blitz, bug, s-chess) with smaller k-factors (and correspondingly lower rating fees). With a properly computerized rating system, this would be no additional expense to the CFC and would bring in additional revenue. The most prestigious and serious events would be FIDE rated as well, if desired.
I don't know what the actual numbers are for some of the above (especially the cost of administering the membership system), but I think it's wrong to say that this approach "makes no sense". I think many of us very much want people to "wander in and play" - chess in Canada should not be a closed shop which excludes casual players by having a meaningless membership fee act as a barrier to new players.
Re: Outsourcing and the Grassroots CFC Restructuring Package
Hi Egis:
Our platform is based on keeping the functions of the ED in house, and the rating system and the website. We feel that our own control over these things is cost-manageable after restructuring. But it does not necessarily exclude outsourcing the rating system for example, or the website. We just feel that is not likely the best way to go.
As to stopping any outsourcing, that is not within the scope of our campaign. We are only asking that the Governors hold a " straw vote " - which is not binding on CFC. So we by our actions will have done nothing concrete in the sense of making any binding decisions. But we feel that the preferences of the Governors indicated by their voting will definitely be influential, and affect the deliberations of the incoming Governors and the RFP Committee.
Bob Armstrong – CFC Life Member/former chess club executive
Chris Mallon – past CFC President/ current OCA President
Steve Karpik – CFC member/chess club executive
Rick Garel – CFC member/chess club executive
Caesar Posylek – CFC Governor/ chess club executive
Kerry Liles – incoming CFC Governor/ chess club executive/ OCA Executive
Jerry Kitich – CFC member/former chess club executive
Dave Broughton – former CFC Governor and Executive / former OCA Director/ former CFC member
Ken Kurkowski – CFC member
Frank Dixon – former CFC Governor/ tournament director/tournament organizer/ former
chess club executive.
John Brown – CFC member/ tournament organizer/ chess club executive
Vlad Dobrich – tournament director/ tournament organizer/ chess club executive/ former CFC member
Doug Gillis – CFC Member
Tyler Longo – CFC Member
Jim Roe – CFC Member
Luke Peristy – CFC Member
Dinesh Dattani – CFC Member
Pino Verde – CFC Member
Hans Jung - CFC and OCA life member, former CFC governor, former CFC executive, former editor Chess Canada, chess club executive, chess coordinator City of Kitchener, tournament director, tournament organizer, chess promoter.
I don't follow the argument that the CFC rating fees are too high. If there was no CFC membership fee, so that anyone could play in a rated tournament, then the rating fee (which I think is $3 per event at the moment) is pretty nominal...
To be more accurate the rating fee is $3.00 per person per event. Not an insignificant amount IMO.
Rating fees for Actives should cost much less. As a matter of fact our league doesn't bother having the CFC officially rate our Actives -- we do our own rating lists for those (14 tournaments/year) for free.
I also like the idea of a unified rating with lower multiples for the faster time controls.
Tweet
Comment