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.
Well, I thought that maybe your offer of a volunteer review by a professional (yourself) was still on the table. Bob is no longer part of the CFC Executive, so we have no knowledge of any past dealings you may have had with him.
The charitable status thing is in the past, as well. So let's move forward. Certainly it was well advertized at the time it happened.
My offer to Bob was for a specific matter that he called for qualified volunteers to help with. That offer was rejected out of hand. I don't believe that Bob had any serious intentions to begin with. I think he was just calling for volunteers so that he could say publicly that he had tried. The way that was handled has soured me on volunteering for the CFC. If I remember correctly Bob was also not on the CFC executive at the time he made the request either. You have no knowledge? Was Bob acting as a rogue? Did you not read about the matter and his postings in reply to Duncan McKinnon on Chesstalk? Are you not aware of any and all past matters involving past CFC executive? Are the messy records, requiring hours of audit work according to Bob, all cleared up now on this matter?
If you are asking for my help now then ask me nicely. Not in a back handed way.
Well publicized? That does not exempt the need to put relevant and material items in the financial statements for any user of said statements. When Ford or RIM or GE have major news items happen do they just leave it out of their financials because it was already in the news? Come on you know better than that. You can disagree with me all you like, you can circle the wagons at the first sign of any criticism but let's not debase basic accounting principles. You are better than that.
Last edited by Zeljko Kitich; Wednesday, 26th June, 2013, 12:04 PM.
My offer to Bob was for a specific matter that he called for qualified volunteers to help with. That offer was rejected out of hand. I don't believe that Bob had any serious intentions to begin with. I think he was just calling for volunteers so that he could say publicly that he had tried. The way that was handled has soured me on volunteering for the CFC. If I remember correctly Bob was also not on the CFC executive at the time he made the request either. You have no knowledge? Was Bob acting as a rogue? Did you not read about the matter and his postings in reply to Duncan McKinnon on Chesstalk? Are you not aware of any and all past matters involving past CFC executive? Are the messy records, requiring hours of audit work according to Bob, all cleared up now on this matter?
If you are asking for my help now then ask me nicely. Not in a back handed way.
Well publicized? That does not exempt the need to put relevant and material items in the financial statements for any user of said statements. When Ford or RIM or GE have major news items happen do they just leave it out of their financials because it was already in the news? Come on you know better than that. You can disagree with me all you like, you can circle the wagons at the first sign of any criticism but let's not debase basic accounting principles. You are better than that.
I'll agree that I'm not a professional accountant.
For the record, I have served as CFC Treasurer from July 2010 until present. While I was on several previous Executives, the last time before 2010 was 2001. I know that Bob was on the Executive (Treasurer) and then Executive Director and then neither and then back on the Executive (President) with me in 2010.
So I'm not sure what time period you're referring to.
Interesting, you criticize me for typos and Paul Beckwith writes long wiinded diatribes about how I edit too much. At least Jordan's suggestions about improving my writing style, punctuation and so on are helpful. Me stifle conversation? I'm pretty easy to ignore. I'm sure if you really try you can do so.
Oh and watch your back; the next time you make a typo I'll be all over you. Cause you know, that's what we do here on Chesstalk, right? At least I spelled naive correctly.
For a guy who spews more venom than most on this board, you're awfully thin-skinned.
"We hang the petty thieves and appoint the great ones to public office." - Aesop
"Only the dead have seen the end of war." - Plato
"If once a man indulges himself in murder, very soon he comes to think little of robbing; and from robbing he comes next to drinking and Sabbath-breaking, and from that to incivility and procrastination." - Thomas De Quincey
Zeljko, you keep telling this story over and over again. I know I will regret this, but to set the record straight:
Zeljko: My offer to Bob was for a specific matter that he called for qualified volunteers to help with.
The specific matter in question is the CFC Youth Fund on and around 2007. At that time the accounting records were a total mess. This has been well documented and discussed at length. I was elected Treasurer in July 2007, and later hired as Executive Director in December 2007. My first priority was to get the office functioning effectively again and to meet the immediate needs of the members. Unfortunately, cleaning up the accounting records became a lesser priority. I was replaced as ED the next year and so I lost the opportunity to finish the job. When Gerry took over ED, in order to move forward, old balances were simply written off. A complete and full accounting of the 2005-2007 years has never been fully achieved. In hindsight, I regret not having given this a greater priority at the time.
The Ottawa organizers made a sizable contribution to the CFC Youth fund in 2007. Due to our accounting deficiencies at the time, we have never been able to give them a complete and satisfactory answer to their question of “how was all that money spent?” I feel bad about that. So, yes I did offer to go back and dig thru all the old records and try again to reconcile them as long as another volunteer was willing to help. I did stipulate that this volunteer needed to be an experienced accountant, willing to put in the time needed, and be professional and objective.
Zeljko: That offer was rejected out of hand. I don't believe that Bob had any serious intentions to begin with. I think he was just calling for volunteers so that he could say publicly that he had tried. The way that was handled has soured me on volunteering for the CFC.
Yours was the only offer I did receive. I did reject your offer for the following 3 reasons:
1. You do not possess the necessary experience required for the assignment. You did try to persuade me otherwise, but your argument was weak, and I think you know it.
2. You also told me you would be heading for Europe in a few months to go to school. This meant it was unlikely you would be available to see the project thru to completion.
3. I do question your objectivity. IMHO, you seem to have a number of axes to grind. I do question whether you possess the demeanor and objectivity required.
Zeljko: If I remember correctly Bob was also not on the CFC executive at the time he made the request either. You have no knowledge? Was Bob acting as a rogue?
Well, when was that exactly? I probably was on the executive as either President or Past President.
Zeljko: Did you not read about the matter and his postings in reply to Duncan McKinnon on Chesstalk?
Who is Duncan McKinnon?
Zeljko: Are the messy records, requiring hours of audit work according to Bob, all cleared up now on this matter?
No. The organization has moved on, corrected the deficiencies, hired an outside auditor, and is focused on the future.
Last edited by Bob Gillanders; Wednesday, 26th June, 2013, 02:41 PM.
The specific matter in question is the CFC Youth Fund on and around 2007. At that time the accounting records were a total mess. This has been well documented and discussed at length. I was elected Treasurer in July 2007, and later hired as Executive Director in December 2007. My first priority was to get the office functioning effectively again and to meet the immediate needs of the members. Unfortunately, cleaning up the accounting records became a lesser priority. I was replaced as ED the next year and so I lost the opportunity to finish the job. When Gerry took over ED, in order to move forward, old balances were simply written off. A complete and full accounting of the 2005-2007 years has never been fully achieved. In hindsight, I regret not having given this a greater priority at the time.
The Ottawa organizers made a sizable contribution to the CFC Youth fund in 2007. Due to our accounting deficiencies at the time, we have never been able to give them a complete and satisfactory answer to their question of “how was all that money spent?” I feel bad about that. So, yes I did offer to go back and dig thru all the old records and try again to reconcile them as long as another volunteer was willing to help. I did stipulate that this volunteer needed to be an experienced accountant, willing to put in the time needed, and be professional and objective.
That certainly sounds like a good argument for an annual audit.
I'm not thin skinned I'm just not a fan of the cheapos you throw out about typos and such. When I say just ignore me I'm quite serious. I don't mind at all. So carry on with the conversation you accuse me of stopping. I think you'll find you can.
Last edited by Zeljko Kitich; Wednesday, 26th June, 2013, 06:57 PM.
Wow congratulations, an explanation more than a year later that disparages me as being an unsuitable volunteer. I was the treasurer from 2006 to 2008 of a 3000 member union local where I initiated just such a professional independent audit, have an accounting and finance double major and had some months to complete the project. Initiating the audit required a lot of accounting work on my part due to ancient accounts receivable, major bills unpaid for up to a year, negative account balances, fines to the CRA for late filing and payments, and poor treasury management that was costing $100,000 per year. Not to mention no computer back up of prior years records and other matters. Just how complicated were these messy accounting records that they would require more than a few months to sort out. Why don't you just admit that you were never serious in the first place instead of engaging in cover your ass character assassination of me. The simple fact remains that you are admitting that CFC records were in a mess. Actually a 'total mess', wow.
This seems exactly the kind of organizational mess that could benefit from an audit. Moved on? The CFC says they know nothing of this matter. How can they correct deficiencies they are unaware of? I question whether you possess the demeanor and quality to properly address these issues. You take a very blase attitude for someone who is a professional accountant. To wit you never straightened these records out or got to the bottom of the issue. You kept going on about how much work would be involved when we discussed it. In place of objectivity you substitute an apparent desire to white wash the matter. You seriously suggest that an accounting graduate does not know enough accounting to tackle the matter at hand? A critical eye is needed, not a blind eye. If you were hoping to get a patsy to volunteer you are right I wasn't ever going to be that patsy. You will however remember that I offered to sign a confidentiality agreement that I would not discuss the findings with anyone, including publicly. You keep using the excuse that you had no time. Well a volunteer stepped forward to help you with that issue. I think you can stop using that excuse. You only asked for a knowledgeable volunteer. These other requirements you are adding now to CYA yourself. Go back to the original post. Here I will help you. http://www.chesstalk.info/forum/show...tich+volunteer "But I do have conditions. The volunteer must have an accounting background, willing to invest the time needed, and they must be fair and objective. Otherwise, we are just wasting our time." Did you say experienced accountant? No you did not. Is an accounting degree an accounting background? Yes I think most people would agree it is. Did I tell you I was going on exchange in a few months. Yes I did in making the point let's start now and not put it off for a few months more.
You failed to address the matter satisfactorily despite having an official position and a paid position, and instead have a shopping list of excuses. Where were the internal controls and procedures to prevent this 'total mess' in the first place? Who is the unsuitable one here? It doesn't take an experienced accountant to generate excuses. This still leaves me wondering why Larry Bevand is so dead set against an audit given this past history of accounting records being a 'total mess'. Especially involving youth chess, albeit in an organization that is not his own and not his to run.
I'm glad that an auditor has been hired. I just hope that person has done their due diligence and seriously considered if they want an organization like the CFC as a client.
Or Duncan Smith or whoever. I think you know who I mean, unless you have no memory at all. For the record Duncan McKinnon is a friend of mine. My apologies to him.
Last edited by Zeljko Kitich; Wednesday, 26th June, 2013, 07:39 PM.
I'll agree that I'm not a professional accountant either. However, I think even a non-professional accountant approving annual financial statements should be up to speed on what needs to be disclosed. So in this case hiring a pro is a good step if you are not up to speed on disclosure standards. However, I will say auditing standards require that a client be knowledgeable as the CA can't both do the accounting and auditing. They have to rely on the client being able to do their own accounting. Otherwise you may need to hire another firm to do the accounting.
Last edited by Zeljko Kitich; Wednesday, 26th June, 2013, 07:17 PM.
"We hang the petty thieves and appoint the great ones to public office." - Aesop
"Only the dead have seen the end of war." - Plato
"If once a man indulges himself in murder, very soon he comes to think little of robbing; and from robbing he comes next to drinking and Sabbath-breaking, and from that to incivility and procrastination." - Thomas De Quincey
Exactly, that's what I'm talking about. Just say whatever and ignore me. Well done. And you will find that I have not stopped any conversations. You don't know how proud I am of you at this moment.
Last edited by Zeljko Kitich; Wednesday, 26th June, 2013, 07:39 PM.
Wow congratulations, an explanation more than a year later that disparages me as being an unsuitable volunteer. I was the treasurer from 2006 to 2008 of a 3000 member union local where I initiated just such a professional independent audit, have an accounting and finance double major and had some months to complete the project...
I'm guessing Mr. Gillanders had more than enough reason to decline your services. There are a few things he likely considered:
1. Are you a CA?
2. Have you worked in accounting professionally for ~ 5+ years?
3. Validity of your degree?
4. Your conduct on ChessTalk?
I'm guessing he may have been concerned by one or more of the above points.
Mr. Kitich is obviously a big fan of bureaucracy and formal rules from reading his opinions on many topics over the years. Often,
what works and is necessary for big business is totally inappropriate for small businesses. Having run a small business for numerous
years, I know you get resourceful in many areas. One would trust that organizations like the CMA and CFC could find the right resourceful
people for these roles. The CFC has in the past often found the wrong people ( including executive ), whether out of lack of choice
or not, hard to say. Bureaucracy, particularily federal government style, was a proven bad fit for the CFC. I think as an enterpreuner
you would have far better judgement on how the CFC or CMA should balance its books etc then Mr. Kitich. One cannot ignore the need
for integrity but keeping an open book should do the trick for the CFC.
ps Not saying the CMA is a small business, but the CFC basically is as of now.
Last edited by Duncan Smith; Thursday, 27th June, 2013, 02:40 AM.
According to Canadian Industry Profiles, a small business is defined as one with revenue between $30,000 and $5 million.A medium business has revenues between $5 million and $25 million.
Statistics Canada defines small businesses as firms with less than 500 employees and less than $50 million in annual revenues.
The Canadian Council of Ministers of the Environment defines business size according to the number of employees. Small Business has less than 50 employees. Medium Business has 51 to 500 employees.
So yes, the CMA is considered a small business in Canada.
Tweet
Comment