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 CFC Women's Coordinator (who is in fact a woman) is the seconder of the motion currently being debated (or fussed about, as you may call it :) ).
Being the seconder of a motion does not automatically mean that the seconder supports the motion. Under Roberts Rules it can simply mean the seconder does want to see it discussed. Often who the seconder is is not that important as usually someone in the room will agree to second the motion. In this case perhaps the mover thought the optics might be better with the Women`s Coordinator as the seconder. Who knows...
Felix Dumont, Quebec CFC Governor, has done his own survey of women players, and they do not support the Women's Coordinator position. So it appears the women are divided on this one, but the Women's Coordinator is still going ahead anyways.
Bob A
His own survey? I think you are being overly kind. He talked to 'some women'. We don't know how many, what question he asked them, whether they even realized it was a survey or even if they were related to him. Canadians tend to agree with whatever someone is talking to them about. It's part of our politeness, especially if we think it's just talk and not going anywhere important. Especially if the question under discussion is set up in a certain way to confirm the askers own bias and views. For example: Nah, you don't really want or need a Women's Coordinator do you? What use would that be to you? (or the French equivalent).
If the CFC or FQE wanted to conduct a survey they could do a lot better than that.
Maybe if Felix tells you he talked to 'some' Quebecers and the result was they wanted to leave Canada, you would accept that as a survey as well and say bye-bye Quebec. That would be a good referendum question: Come on you don't really want to stay part of this country do you?
Last edited by Zeljko Kitich; Thursday, 4th April, 2013, 06:30 PM.
Being the seconder of a motion does not automatically mean that the seconder supports the motion. Under Roberts Rules it can simply mean the seconder does want to see it discussed. Often who the seconder is is not that important as usually someone in the room will agree to second the motion. In this case perhaps the mover thought the optics might be better with the Women`s Coordinator as the seconder. Who knows...
She does support the motion. She helped create the motion. Check out her comments at the meeting.
Last edited by Vlad Drkulec; Thursday, 4th April, 2013, 10:07 PM.
Felix Dumont, Quebec CFC Governor, has done his own survey of women players, and they do not support the Women's Coordinator position. So it appears the women are divided on this one, but the Women's Coordinator is still going ahead anyways.
Bob A
My survey of Windsor girls and young women shows ten in favour and none opposed. Surveyed individuals range in age from eight to eighteen. Of course their opinions don't count because they aren't on the list of the top 100 juniors. I guess we'll have to wait until after they play in a few more tournaments when they will be on the list judging from their recent results.
His own survey? I think you are being overly kind. He talked to 'some women'. We don't know how many, what question he asked them, whether they even realized it was a survey or even if they were related to him. Canadians tend to agree with whatever someone is talking to them about. It's part of our politeness, especially if we think it's just talk and not going anywhere important. Especially if the question under discussion is set up in a certain way to confirm the askers own bias and views. For example: Nah, you don't really want or need a Women's Coordinator do you? What use would that be to you? (or the French equivalent).
If the CFC or FQE wanted to conduct a survey they could do a lot better than that.
Maybe if Felix tells you he talked to 'some' Quebecers and the result was they wanted to leave Canada, you would accept that as a survey as well and say bye-bye Quebec. That would be a good referendum question: Come on you don't really want to stay part of this country do you?
I sent emails asking : "Would you be in favour of a national women master titles". That's it, nothing less, nothing more.
Last year I was favourable to the idea, but after some talk while organizing the Women's closed (with Goddesschess for example), I realized it was actually an awful idea.
I'll stop there, as I don't like to feed trolls :)
Last year I was favourable to the idea, but after some talk while organizing the Women's closed (with Goddesschess for example), I realized it was actually an awful idea.
Last year you were in favour? I didn't get the first email from Liza Orlova which started this ball rolling until January of this year. Who did you talk to? Were they psychics in addition to being strong female chessplayers?
I realize that the chess society of he man woman haters enjoy ridiculing the female FIDE titles but the fact is the girls do enjoy achieving them. I hate to employ that old usenet cliche of "I have supporters in email" but as a matter of fact I do. Quit trying to suck the joy out of the air.
Last year you were in favour? I didn't get the first email from Liza Orlova which started this ball rolling until January of this year. Who did you talk to? Were they psychics in addition to being strong female chessplayers?
I realize that the chess society of he man woman haters enjoy ridiculing the female FIDE titles but the fact is the girls do enjoy achieving them. I hate to employ that old usenet cliche of "I have supporters in email" but as a matter of fact I do. Quit trying to suck the joy out of the air.
To be clear: Liza Orlova started the ball rolling on creating the WNM title?
Re : Re: Re : Re: Separate Women's System - Accomplish Its Goals??
Chess is supposed to be prestigious, but many people at the CFC make everything in their power to make the federation look less and less serious. No wonder why sponsors and players fear the federation.
Last year you were in favour? I didn't get the first email from Liza Orlova which started this ball rolling until January of this year. Who did you talk to? Were they psychics in addition to being strong female chessplayers?
I realize that the chess society of he man woman haters enjoy ridiculing the female FIDE titles but the fact is the girls do enjoy achieving them. I hate to employ that old usenet cliche of "I have supporters in email" but as a matter of fact I do.
I had some reserves, but I thought some women might like it. However, even those to who I talked didn't like the idea... And they did have good arguments (mostly about how they didn't want to feel inferior to men).They were strong female players (the best we have in Quebec).
Quit trying to suck the joy out of the air.
You are truly pathetic :)
Last edited by Felix Dumont; Friday, 5th April, 2013, 12:03 AM.
To be clear: Liza Orlova started the ball rolling on creating the WNM title?
She asked me about it thinking that it might already exist. I thought it was an idea that might help keep girls playing chess. I asked some women and girls about it and all thought it was a good idea and might be something that would encourage them to continue to play so that they can pursue the title.
If there is blame and lynch mobs forming blame me and not Liza. I think it is a good idea. I don't think you can expect to see any kind of corporate or government sponsorship of chess without a thriving chess scene with representatives of both sexes.
The Canadian women's hockey team is not quite as strong as the Men's but that doesn't mean it isn't entertaining and chess would be doing exponentially better if we had one tenth of their sponsorship dollars or endorsement deals.
She asked me about it thinking that it might already exist. I thought it was an idea that might help keep girls playing chess. I asked some women and girls about it and all thought it was a good idea and might be something that would encourage them to continue to play so that they can pursue the title.
If there is blame and lynch mobs forming blame me and not Liza. I think it is a good idea. I don't think you can expect to see any kind of corporate or government sponsorship of chess without a thriving chess scene with representatives of both sexes.
The Canadian women's hockey team is not quite as strong as the Men's but that doesn't mean it isn't entertaining and chess would be doing exponentially better if we had one tenth of their sponsorship dollars or endorsement deals.
I admire your thought process and desire to keep more female players playing but I don't think the problem is giving out more Halloween candy. With the rate of CFC inflation these days and the fact that everyone I know is becoming a master, yes even Alex Ferreira, I do not think it will be difficult for anyone to get a 1900 CFC rating and maintain it. Even when players I know of have had bad tournaments, their rating somehow either goes up or stays the same, no one goes down anymore.
I do hope the girls in Windsor continue to improve at the rate they are right now and hopefully become strong enough to outgrow the fake titles that the CFC has given out to everyone. I don't think getting a 1900 rating or a 2100 rating should be an accomplishment worth treasuring regardless of your gender.
She asked me about it thinking that it might already exist. I thought it was an idea that might help keep girls playing chess. I asked some women and girls about it and all thought it was a good idea and might be something that would encourage them to continue to play so that they can pursue the title.
If there is blame and lynch mobs forming blame me and not Liza. I think it is a good idea. I don't think you can expect to see any kind of corporate or government sponsorship of chess without a thriving chess scene with representatives of both sexes.
The Canadian women's hockey team is not quite as strong as the Men's but that doesn't mean it isn't entertaining and chess would be doing exponentially better if we had one tenth of their sponsorship dollars or endorsement deals.
Thanks for the clarification Vlad. And if I'm not mistaken she already qualifies for the title.
I admire your thought process and desire to keep more female players playing but I don't think the problem is giving out more Halloween candy. With the rate of CFC inflation these days and the fact that everyone I know is becoming a master, yes even Alex Ferreira, I do not think it will be difficult for anyone to get a 1900 CFC rating and maintain it. Even when players I know of have had bad tournaments, their rating somehow either goes up or stays the same, no one goes down anymore.
You obviously haven't been watching my rating.
I do hope the girls in Windsor continue to improve at the rate they are right now and hopefully become strong enough to outgrow the fake titles that the CFC has given out to everyone.
Thank you for that wish. If some of them keep going at the current rate they should challenge for a spot on the women's olympiad team in a year or two and the national team a year or two after that. Of course they will probably hit a plateau or two somewhere along the way. A five hundred point improvement is easier going from 1200 to 1700 than from 1700 to 2200 but it is fun watching it happen.
I don't think getting a 1900 rating or a 2100 rating should be an accomplishment worth treasuring regardless of your gender.
You do realize that if everyone felt that way they might just quit playing. Where would the prize funds come from then?
Kasparov disparagingly called some 2600ish GMs tourists so I guess its turtles all the way down.
You do realize that if everyone felt that way they might just quit playing. Where would the prize funds come from then?
Whoa, I hope none of the Windsor chess kids are seeing and understanding that comment. I understand, Vlad, that it is hard dealing with Bindi, who is having trouble dealing with the fact he missed out in the birth lottery to be the leader of North Korea despite being fully qualified otherwise.
But even so, don't say that the only reason we bring kids out to chess clubs is to feed the prize funds. Please tell us that's not your real motivation.
We should much prefer the Gillanders take, which is that we teach the kids the fun and enjoyment, the creativity and artistry of chess... rating be damned.
Only the rushing is heard...
Onward flies the bird.
Re: Re : Re: Separate Women's System - Accomplish Its Goals??
[QUOTE=Paul Bonham;66305]Quote from Bindi Cheng:
I don't think getting a 1900 rating or a 2100 rating should be an accomplishment worth treasuring regardless of your gender.
You do realize that if everyone felt that way they might just quit playing. Where would the prize funds come from then?
But even so, don't say that the only reason we bring kids out to chess clubs is to feed the prize funds. Please tell us that's not your real motivation.
There you go again Paul.
We don't have prize funds in Windsor. Sometimes there are trophies or ribbons. Entry fees tend to range in the zero or ten to twenty dollar range. When there are prize funds, in Detroit for example, the kids tend to win more than their share.
If everyone rated up to 2100 suddenly decided that their quest for chess perfection was a futile one and that their time was wasted, well there really wouldn't be much opportunity for talented IMs like Bindi to win wheelbarrows full of prizes. There is that thought experiment that was a book and a PBS series called "One Day After People". Maybe we need to do something similar and call it "One Day After the 2100s" when everyone rated 2101 and above was left to fend for themselves while everyone under 2100 slipped into some wormhole and disappeared. Maybe we could get a bunch of Baudelaire and Nietzsche inspired existential groupies to write some prose poems on the premise.
We should much prefer the Gillanders take, which is that we teach the kids the fun and enjoyment, the creativity and artistry of chess... rating be damned.
That's great in theory. Do you actually know any chess kids?
Tweet
Comment