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 organizer part for this tournament was of over $20 000 ($75 per person). We all know that running a 3 days tournament doesn't cost that much. Now I asked a simple question : do you intend to keep it or not? I'm not even criticizing it. I'm asking. Personally, I would invest it back into the youth (as we promised for 2014). But if you decide not do that, so be it. Still, you cannot avoid the question forever.
...
(278 CYCC entries) x ($75 to $100 per child*) > $20,000.
* EF = $225 pre-deadline and $250 post-deadline
More specifically, I'd like an answer to this question: how much of the above $20,000+ was or will be used to fund 2013 CO expenses of any kind (i.e. including things like appearance fees for GMs, travel/accommodation expenses for GMs, etc.)?
This question came up 2 or 3 years ago and, to the best of my recollection, was never satisfactorily addressed. Using the parents of CYCC participants to help fund the CO, without their prior knowledge or consent, would be sleazy and unethical in my opinion. Since such behaviour would reflect badly on the CFC, I think CFC members, as well as the parents of CYCC participants, deserve an answer.
"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
In another thread, in regard to the 2013 CYCC, Felix Dumont asked a question that deserves an answer:
(278 CYCC entries) x ($75 to $100 per child*) > $20,000.
* EF = $225 pre-deadline and $250 post-deadline
More specifically, I'd like an answer to this question: how much of the above $20,000+ was or will be used to fund 2013 CO expenses of any kind (i.e. including things like appearance fees for GMs, travel/accommodation expenses for GMs, etc.)?
This question came up 2 or 3 years ago and, to the best of my recollection, was never satisfactorily addressed. Using the parents of CYCC participants to help fund the CO, without their prior knowledge or consent, would be sleazy and unethical in my opinion. Since such behaviour would reflect badly on the CFC, I think CFC members, as well as the parents of CYCC participants, deserve an answer.
I suppose the organizers may decide to answer your question and whatever disposition was made may even satisfy you as to it's morality. But the bid gave as one of it's parameters that $75 went to the organizers and was accepted as the terms for organizing the CYCC, in my view, that is all you need to know. Perhaps they used it to fund the CO, perhaps to fund their next Porsche purchase, or perhaps for worthy youth events. It's all immaterial, none of your business, and completely moral.
Re : Re: Question for CFC and Organizers of 2013 CYCC & CO
Peter,
The point of the question was to know whether or not there would be additional prizes (as it was often the case in the past) or if the money would be used to fund a national project (like the national coaching program). Now that we know that the answer is no, it doesn't really matter where the money went. As to know whether it's moral, or if the CFC should restrict the profit made by organizers, then that's a whole other debate.
I'm not sure if it helps you, but here's what Les Bunning posted during the CFC AGM (it's public) :
There will be medals for the top 3 players in each category and a trophy for the winner in each category. Our break even point is about 200 players. Based on current enrollment we expect to receive about 250 players. This will give us a surplus of approximately $2,500. We may be able to spend this on additional events at the CYCC but if not we will decide what to do with it after the event is over
Apparently, if the projected profit was of only $2500, it means that it cost them about $20 000 to run the event.
In any case, I give you the facts, but am not willing to continue debating on this subject. I prefer to focus on next year's CYCC instead :)
Re: Re : Re: Question for CFC and Organizers of 2013 CYCC & CO
The cost of the CYCC for 2013 involved booking, at a major downtown Ottawa hotel, the National, three blocks from Parliament Hill, in mid-summer, which is peak tourist season in the Canada's capital, four of the hotel's largest rooms for playing sessions and analysis, as well as a medium-sized TD headquarters room. The event also took over the lobby of the hotel for the CYCC, for chess merchant CMA, and displays of pairings and standings. True, there were three days of play at the CYCC this year. However, the bookings for the CYCC for 2013 didn't just cover those three days. The organizers had to book the rooms for the day before the event started, for setup, and space on the day after it ended, for CYCC playoffs. This fit well with the subsequent Canadian Open, which used one less (smaller) room for its operations, at the same location, so that setup needed to be modified only slightly for the Open, which began the same day the CYCC playoffs ended. With nearly 280 players, the CYCC also needed more arbiters and assistants than for a smaller event.
I was an arbiter for both the 2013 CYCC and Open, but wasn't involved at all in the financial planning of the events, either before or during. I am entirely convinced of the honesty and honourable conduct of the Ottawa organizers. And I will add this: many players, parents, and coaches complimented the organizers on putting on a great set of events. The playing conditions were excellent for the Open. They were very good for most players in the CYCC; it was a bit crowded and hot for some of the sections.
Re: Re : Re: Question for CFC and Organizers of 2013 CYCC & CO
Sorry about that, Felix. I guess I took your question and treated it as if it was the same as my question. Oops! :o
"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
I suppose the organizers may decide to answer your question and whatever disposition was made may even satisfy you as to it's morality. But the bid gave as one of it's parameters that $75 went to the organizers and was accepted as the terms for organizing the CYCC, in my view, that is all you need to know. Perhaps they used it to fund the CO, perhaps to fund their next Porsche purchase, or perhaps for worthy youth events. It's all immaterial, none of your business, and completely moral.
Nonsense! Of course it's material and, as a CFC member, of course it's my business (just as it should be every member's business) **IF** CYCC organizers are taking advantage of parents by using surplus CYCC cash flows to fund a different tournament, namely: the CO. **IF** the CYCC organizers (who reportedly are also the CO organizers) are enabling this cross-funding of tournaments without the prior knowledge or consent of the parents of CYCC players, then of course this is unethical behaviour. Don't believe me? Next year, have the CYCC/CO organizers add $75 to the CO entry fees and post a pre-tournament public message thanking CO entrants for helping to fund the CYCC - what kind of reaction do you think you'll see?
To be clear, I most definitely have no objection to the CYCC organizers using their $75-$100 per child to cover all of the direct expenses of organizing the CYCC, including any fair and reasonable fees to be paid to TDs and members of the organizing committee. However, if members of the organizing committee choose to 'donate' their fees to the CO which they are also organizing, then that doesn't work as being ethical, imo. If they don't want their just fees for organizing the CYCC then they should give the parents a break by lowering the entry fee.
Given all of the BS that's come to light in the Canadian chess scene over the last 13 years, I'm not holding my breath waiting for an answer to my question.
"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
That's nice, Hal! Was it or was it not the case that in at least one prior year CYCC organizers used surplus CYCC funds to help fund the CO which they were also running?
"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
.....
To be clear, I most definitely have no objection to the CYCC organizers using their $75-$100 per child to cover all of the direct expenses of organizing the CYCC, including any fair and reasonable fees to be paid to TDs and members of the organizing committee. However, if members of the organizing committee choose to 'donate' their fees to the CO which they are also organizing, then that doesn't work as being ethical, imo. ...
that's pretty bizarre. Paying someone what you agree are fair and reasonable amounts for their time and then saying that it is unethical for them to take their cash out of their wallet and give it to a different event...
that's pretty bizarre. Paying someone what you agree are fair and reasonable amounts for their time and then saying that it is unethical for them to take their cash out of their wallet and give it to a different event...
Fine, do it your way, Roger. But your way has an odour to it. I think you'd have a difficult time convincing a CYCC parent that your little non-arm's length transaction wasn't just a means of easing your conscience for screwing the parent out of a few extra dollars to bolster your CO prize fund.
If you think this one way, cross-funding is such a great idea then why not be open with the CYCC parents? ("We know you paid your child's CYCC entry fee but how about another $50 to help us out with our CO expenses ? C'mon, be a sport, eh.")
p.s. Let's not forget that your Ottawa pals haven't weighed in yet. Perhaps they ran their CYCC/CO events without any cross-funding, in which case my hat is off to them for doing things the right way.
Last edited by Peter McKillop; Sunday, 28th July, 2013, 08:59 PM.
Reason: p.s.
"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
Fine, do it your way, Roger. But your way has an odour to it. I think you'd have a difficult time convincing a CYCC parent that your little non-arm's length transaction wasn't just a means of easing your conscience for screwing the parent out of a few extra dollars to bolster your CO prize fund.
If you think this one way, cross-funding is such a great idea then why not be open with the CYCC parents? ("We know you paid your child's CYCC entry fee but how about another $50 to help us out with our CO expenses ? C'mon, be a sport, eh.")
p.s. Let's not forget that your Ottawa pals haven't weighed in yet. Perhaps they ran their CYCC/CO events without any cross-funding, in which case my hat is off to them for doing things the right way.
Hi Peter, I can understand your wanting that question answered. It's somewhat similar to paying taxes and finding out that a lot of those tax dollars went to things you don't support or even worse, to politician junkets to Las Vegas all expenses paid. Not quite the same though, because taxes are something we are forced to pay and the only feedback we can give besides letters of rage is a single, solitary vote. And so I CERTAINLY agree with you that this question needs answering so that nothing is being done "under the covers".
But on the ethical question, whether it's ethical or not, remember that this is all in the realm of the free market and the laws of supply and demand, and everyone can find unethical behavior in the free market.
That extra $75 is not without its consequences. It may have already made one or more set of parents decide not to send their kid(s) to the CYCC. In the free market, prices are set and are constantly being adjusted based on what the market will bear. Maybe all those extra chunks of $75 going to the CO actually cost the CYCC lost revenue. That is for the organizers to assess and determine, and future organizers to do the same and react on.
Think of what would have happened if instead of $75, the agreed on amount was 10 times that. It would have been a pretty barren CYCC.
So in the end, what goes around comes around. Unlike...taxes....:(
But again, yes, the question needs answering, and not only that, but if there was such crossfunding, perhaps someone such as Felix Dumont should follow up, send out letters to each set of parents whose kids attended the CYCC, let them know where $75 of their money went, and ASK them if they approve or disapprove, to help make a decision on next year.
I did love Roger's line about "funding their next Porsche purchase". :D
Only the rushing is heard...
Onward flies the bird.
To be clear, I most definitely have no objection to the CYCC organizers using their $75-$100 per child to cover all of the direct expenses of organizing the CYCC, including any fair and reasonable fees to be paid to TDs and members of the organizing committee. However, if members of the organizing committee choose to 'donate' their fees to the CO which they are also organizing, then that doesn't work as being ethical, imo. If they don't want their just fees for organizing the CYCC then they should give the parents a break by lowering the entry fee.
Peter, I must agree with Hal and Roger. The $75 organizer entry fee share is reasonable, approved, and recommended in the CFC handbook. They put on a quality event at a premium cost site. Whatever portion was leftover for the TD's and organizers, I am sure it was meagre compensation for the many hours of work required. What they choose to do with it is their own business.
If they choose to (allegedly) donation a portion of their hard earned fees to the CO, good for them. It only shows a greater commitment to the chess community. Whatever success you may have in spinning this into something that smells, doesn't make it so. Instead of smearing the organizers, we should be thanking them for their efforts.
Is it any wonder we have so few organizers willing to tackle these major events?
Fine, do it your way, Roger. But your way has an odour to it. I think you'd have a difficult time convincing a CYCC parent that your little non-arm's length transaction wasn't just a means of easing your conscience for screwing the parent out of a few extra dollars to bolster your CO prize fund.
If you think this one way, cross-funding is such a great idea then why not be open with the CYCC parents? ("We know you paid your child's CYCC entry fee but how about another $50 to help us out with our CO expenses ? C'mon, be a sport, eh.")
p.s. Let's not forget that your Ottawa pals haven't weighed in yet. Perhaps they ran their CYCC/CO events without any cross-funding, in which case my hat is off to them for doing things the right way.
Hi Peter, I can understand your wanting that question answered. It's somewhat similar to paying taxes and finding out that a lot of those tax dollars went to things you don't support or even worse, to politician junkets to Las Vegas all expenses paid. Not quite the same though, because taxes are something we are forced to pay and the only feedback we can give besides letters of rage is a single, solitary vote. And so I CERTAINLY agree with you that this question needs answering so that nothing is being done "under the covers".
But on the ethical question, whether it's ethical or not, remember that this is all in the realm of the free market and the laws of supply and demand, and everyone can find unethical behavior in the free market.
That extra $75 is not without its consequences. It may have already made one or more set of parents decide not to send their kid(s) to the CYCC. In the free market, prices are set and are constantly being adjusted based on what the market will bear. Maybe all those extra chunks of $75 going to the CO actually cost the CYCC lost revenue. That is for the organizers to assess and determine, and future organizers to do the same and react on.
Think of what would have happened if instead of $75, the agreed on amount was 10 times that. It would have been a pretty barren CYCC.
So in the end, what goes around comes around. Unlike...taxes....:(
But again, yes, the question needs answering, and not only that, but if there was such crossfunding, perhaps someone such as Felix Dumont should follow up, send out letters to each set of parents whose kids attended the CYCC, let them know where $75 of their money went, and ASK them if they approve or disapprove, to help make a decision on next year.
I did love Roger's line about "funding their next Porsche purchase". :D
Only the rushing is heard...
Onward flies the bird.
Tweet
Comment