Yes and no. I'm always puzzled by questions like this and the famous "aha but who do you mean by the ECF?" It is usually clear from the context.John Upham wrote: ↑Sat Jul 31, 2021 11:44 amShould CSC be added to the grouping labelled earlier as "they"?
Are all users of this place part of the "we" nexus / cabal ?
News
-
- Posts: 1526
- Joined: Fri Oct 21, 2016 4:15 pm
Re: News
-
- Posts: 7283
- Joined: Wed Apr 04, 2007 10:29 am
- Location: Cove, Hampshire, England.
Re: News
Ditto.Matthew Turner wrote: ↑Sat Jul 31, 2021 11:46 amJohn,
I apologise for not responding to you earlier, but I have absolutely no idea what you are banging on about.
British Chess News : britishchessnews.com
Twitter: @BritishChess
Facebook: facebook.com/groups/britishchess
Twitter: @BritishChess
Facebook: facebook.com/groups/britishchess
-
- Posts: 21369
- Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 2:51 pm
Re: News
For what it's worth, Tim usually seems closely associated with Malcolm Pein. Three years ago he stood for Home Director losing narrowly. He had been nominated by Malcolm. That was around the time of the elections for the post-Kirsan FIDE President. Tim had strongly supported the ticket featuring Malcolm.Roger Lancaster wrote: ↑Fri Jul 30, 2021 4:44 pmI'll give it credit for work on the coaching side, although I'm less clear how it has acted as a focal point for organisers, but I'm much less happy about its use of Tim Wall as an attack dog - I'm unclear over the identity of the dog's handler - on ECF directors and possibly others who, in the opinion of many, are doing a good job. That, frankly, isn't why I joined.
Also at that AGM, Mike Truran had a clear round. In other words no-one voting for "None of the above". Given the continuity of Council voters, it might be difficult to drum up an anti-Truran vote.
-
- Posts: 1526
- Joined: Fri Oct 21, 2016 4:15 pm
Re: News
Most people belong to more than one nexus. So not quite as simple as overturning a pro-Truran vote.
I imagine if Mike choses to stand he would defeat Tim Wall fairly easily. I suspect Tim's reputation irretrievably damaged based on the last ECF meeting.
I suspect Malcolm Pein would win, but I am doubtful he wants to be ECF CEO. If he does want to be CEO, most likley he will stand unopposed.
Chris Fegan vs Mike Truran I could not call at this stage. I'd probably vote for Chris, but the campaigning might change my mind.
I would be a bit surprised if anyone else stood with the support of the CSC group. I think some name recognition necessary. But I suppose there are a number of people. Someone sufficiently well known, not directly involved in ECF roles today, might be persuaded to stand. Most English GMs would win if backed by CSC I expect.
I imagine if Mike choses to stand he would defeat Tim Wall fairly easily. I suspect Tim's reputation irretrievably damaged based on the last ECF meeting.
I suspect Malcolm Pein would win, but I am doubtful he wants to be ECF CEO. If he does want to be CEO, most likley he will stand unopposed.
Chris Fegan vs Mike Truran I could not call at this stage. I'd probably vote for Chris, but the campaigning might change my mind.
I would be a bit surprised if anyone else stood with the support of the CSC group. I think some name recognition necessary. But I suppose there are a number of people. Someone sufficiently well known, not directly involved in ECF roles today, might be persuaded to stand. Most English GMs would win if backed by CSC I expect.
-
- Posts: 2076
- Joined: Tue Nov 22, 2011 9:23 pm
- Location: Harrogate
Re: News
There shouldn't be any bar to contested elections; otherwise you may as well let directors serve one reasonably lengthy term and then stand aside. If some people feel there is an alternative direction the CEO/ junior directorship should take then they should make their case. However when there is sufficient ill feeling that personal attacks are being made then I don't think people should be allowed to fence sit - they condemn, condone or do the latter by virtue of silence.
Controller - Yorkshire League
Chairman - Harrogate Chess Club
All views expressed entirely my own
Chairman - Harrogate Chess Club
All views expressed entirely my own
-
- Posts: 10364
- Joined: Mon Aug 04, 2008 10:06 am
- Location: Somewhere you're not
Re: News
Chris Fegan is pretty much in the Tim Wall league when it comes to personal beliigerence.
Was he one of the guys trounced by None Of The Above? I certainly remember him being part of the gang which for some reason chose to launch (with no minuted record that I could find) an official alternative to this forum, a stupid, ill-fated and pointless venture if there ever was one. As I recall one of the supposed purposes of its existence was to provide a better standard of discussion, while one of the actual features of its existence was Chris Fegan doing the opposite.
Last edited by JustinHorton on Sat Jul 31, 2021 4:00 pm, edited 1 time in total.
"Do you play chess?"
"Yes, but I prefer a game with a better chance of cheating."
lostontime.blogspot.com
"Yes, but I prefer a game with a better chance of cheating."
lostontime.blogspot.com
-
- Posts: 21369
- Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 2:51 pm
Re: News
I don't think he has ever stood, other than his re-election as Women's Director.
There was one year when he announced an intention to stand as a non-exec, but withdrew before the AGM. That was in 2015.
viewtopic.php?f=25&t=7670&hilit=chris+f ... 75#p163078
I believe the most recent victories for None Of The Above were also at the 2015 elections which featured
Chief Executive: Phil Ehr - 121 in favour, 173 not this candidate, 15 abstentions
and
Commercial Director: 68 Bob Kane, 214 not this candidate, 27 abstentions
-
- Posts: 1526
- Joined: Fri Oct 21, 2016 4:15 pm
Re: News
If Justin can think of a third belligerent socialist we will have a set.JustinHorton wrote: ↑Sat Jul 31, 2021 3:23 pmChris Fegan is pretty much in the Tim Wall league when it comes to personal beliigerence.
In line with my ongoing position that good guys and bad guys is too simplistic, even if you think Chris is doing more than playing the game with occasional belligerence it doesn't make him inept. Covid aside, I'd describe his term as Women's Director as a success.
I think those involved in the short-lived ECF Forum generally poorly thought of here. But of course being unpopular with the ECForum probably a political advantage with the ECF.
Incidentally no posts on the ECF Council Forum since June 2020. Good to see it aligning to the ECF social media policy.
-
- Posts: 10364
- Joined: Mon Aug 04, 2008 10:06 am
- Location: Somewhere you're not
Re: News
However if somebody is an egregious bully then saying there's good and bad in everyone is not really a helpful way to assess their suitability to perform in a postPaul Cooksey wrote: ↑Sat Jul 31, 2021 6:02 pmIn line with my ongoing position that good guys and bad guys is too simplistic
"Do you play chess?"
"Yes, but I prefer a game with a better chance of cheating."
lostontime.blogspot.com
"Yes, but I prefer a game with a better chance of cheating."
lostontime.blogspot.com
-
- Posts: 1526
- Joined: Fri Oct 21, 2016 4:15 pm
Re: News
Not my argument of course.JustinHorton wrote: ↑Sat Jul 31, 2021 10:29 pmHowever if somebody is an egregious bully then saying there's good and bad in everyone is not really a helpful way to assess their suitability to perform in a postPaul Cooksey wrote: ↑Sat Jul 31, 2021 6:02 pmIn line with my ongoing position that good guys and bad guys is too simplistic
There are people I would disqualify for office. Criminals, people disqualified as company directors, people sacked from jobs for unethical behaviour, etc. At least if I considered that that past behaviour was a good predictor of future behaviour. I usually would, and we are not really talking about rehabilitation.
There are other things I would not consider so egregious. Failure to spell Kieseritsky consistently, being disrespectful to people on internet forums, etc.
Bullying is a difficult one because it is not a precisely defined term. The use of robust argument when talking to people who are not particularly sensitive to it - me or Justin for example - I would not consider bullying. It is one of Sir Humphrey's irregular verbs - I am a plain speaker, he is belligerent, they are bullies. But the same approach directed at someone who was sensitive to it with the intention of silencing them, I would consider bullying.
It is a bit tasteless to speak ill of the dead, but Andrew Paulson was a person I would consider unsuitable for an ECF role based on his behaviour. Perhaps it was acceptable behaviour in other contexts, but by our standards, I think fair to describe him as a bully. I am open to the criticism I did not identify him as a wrong'un sooner, and I only really have the defence of calculated risk taking.
I think Justin's argument is that there are a lot of wrong'uns and English Chess has a problem identifying them. Maybe. I'd say at most 5% of people go in my "not voting for that person however competent they are" category. If Justin or anyone else thinks that number too low, I am open to persuasion. But 50%? No.
The point matters to me because I don't see the number of wrong'uns as a big issue for the ECF. I'm much more concerned about factionalism and lack of cooperation, and having a culture and structures where people who disagree on the right way to achieve a common goal are able to coexist.
-
- Posts: 10364
- Joined: Mon Aug 04, 2008 10:06 am
- Location: Somewhere you're not
Re: News
Well this also might be a question here, no?
And at the same time, it's a very real thing.Paul Cooksey wrote: ↑Sun Aug 01, 2021 7:54 amBullying is a difficult one because it is not a precisely defined term.
"Do you play chess?"
"Yes, but I prefer a game with a better chance of cheating."
lostontime.blogspot.com
"Yes, but I prefer a game with a better chance of cheating."
lostontime.blogspot.com
-
- Posts: 1295
- Joined: Wed Aug 12, 2009 11:12 pm
Re: News
I've been bullied and wouldn't personally vote for somebody displaying those traits. I'm not sure that dismissing it or downplaying it, because it has no impact on you personally is very helpful. True some people are more sensitive than others, but isn't the onus usually on the bully to moderate the behaviour rather than the victim to develop better coping mechanisms?
-
- Posts: 1526
- Joined: Fri Oct 21, 2016 4:15 pm
Re: News
Indeed, which reminds me I wanted to respond to this:
The first part doubtless true, but clear the EJCOA is an organisation which considers engagement in ECF politics part of its remit. Pretending otherwise a bit naive, although in the best traditions of ECF politics to deny being involved in ECF politics. More irregular verbs here - he is a politician, I am just speak for my organisation. I am helping my friends achieve good things, they are plotting, etc.Stephen Westmoreland wrote: ↑Fri Jul 30, 2021 7:49 pmI joined EJCOA for the support in coaching and organisation. I am simply not seeing (in the two meetings that have occurred) any plots to take over.
As regards taking over, I already addressed this in another thread, but coming back to it. Here is the ECF Board: https://www.englishchess.org.uk/about/ecf-officials/. 12 votes. 5 of them I consider part of the group we are discussing. The various other nexuses I'd count at up to 3.
I think it does make a difference that we are talking about and to the biggest group. More influence for them is taking over. I'm not opposed to that outright, but it gives me a much greater focus on how that degree of control will be used.
Generally, I don't think factionalism is ended by a faction winning. It is about organisational culture. I got interested in this when Phil Ehr's term as CEO started to obviously fail. The received wisdom is that voluntary organisations need very strong culture, because some of the things that work in corporations with employees don't work with volunteers.