ECF Code of Conduct

[Jonathan Rogers]

I have rather lost track of what happened to the rushed ECF Code of Conduct which came into force last year, following CJ-gate-gate-gate* and seemed to apply only to ECF officials. Is it still in a state of suspension? Whatever the answer to that, it seems that sooner or later the ECF will have to think about a Code of Conduct which applies to all of its members (perhaps it is already doing this - it must have occurred to them). We might need to ban people for (proven) cheating, or perhaps to suspend or ban people who harrass or commit offences against other chess players (we don't want organisers or players feeling bullied out of the game; looking at Sabrina's thread, we can see that one problem has been that there has been no obvious avenue, short of police action, through which to explore some of the communications aimed at her). We may also want to ban some who have offended in other such circumstances which might suggest they pose a risk at chess tournaments, and so on.

I daresay that such a Code would provoke a record number of pages on this forum. There will be questions not only of defining the behaviour which attracts sanctions, and the sanctions themselves, but also the composition of any panels called upon to enforce it - and and I don't wish to prompt any such process now. But if and when the time comes, we should, in my view, accept the need for such a Code and just put our energies into getting the details right.


* One began to lose track of the things which might have merited investigation/open discussion

[Paul McKeown]

Jonathan, I agree as to the need.

I would suggest independence of the tribunals from the ECF is vital, preferably with at least one person without any connection to the chess world in each tribunal, and at least one from the chess world, but not directly connected to English chess. I would also suggest that one appeal against any tribunal is necessary, but that further appeals would simply provide avenues for the vexatious.

[Angus French]

I believe the April 2013 Finance Council meeting agreed with the Board's proposal to suspend the Code and asked Chris Majer, as Chairman of the Governance Committee, to come up with proposals for a new version. I don't recall reading anything further.

[David Robertson]

I too agree with the sentiment and the principles underpinning Jonathan's post. There's a necessity and urgency too. However, practical and operational matters trouble me.

We are, let's be honest, a colossally disputatious community. We're a pretty self-righteous bunch too. And some of us can be tiresomely pettifogging. If we weren't at the same time restrained by colossal penny-pinching, I suspect the lower courts of the land would be clogged with relentless litigation from within our number. We can all cite examples anyway.

Hence any Code of Conduct would need to be cut from an unusually large canvas - from in-game interpersonal conduct and inter-player general behaviour through to institutional bureaucratic conduct and inter-organisational disputes. My eyes roll skywards at the prospect (cue emoticon: )

And any tribunal to emerge from the drafting process would likely need to meet in permanent session, at least for the first decade (cue emoticon: banging head against desktop)

[Jonathan Rogers]

In turn I agree with much of that. The Code would have to provide a filter system, so that a complaint only goes to a full Panel hearing where there is some evidence of wrongdoing which (if it were later to be established) would be serious enough to be worth the attention of the panel. Often the parties could be sent on their way, as would be the case with many standard cases of bad language and bad manners. And we would then adopt and adapt in the light of experience. Fees for lodging complaints could be considered in some cases too.

The more important point is that we all agree that it is a disaster in waiting that the ECF currently has no mechanism for dealing, inter alia, with suspected cheating.

[Paul Dupré]

Jonathan,

Where do you stand on people trying to build empires within chess, by denigrating what others have done to build their empire.

Paul

[Andrew Martin]

Well said Paul! There are many in English chess who have nothing to offer but complaints.

[Jonathan Rogers]

Jonathan,

Where do you stand on people trying to build empires within chess, by denigrating what others have done to build their empire.

Paul

You might need to illustrate your question with an example. In the abstract though, whether any Code of Conduct should apply should depend, I suppose, largely on whether the "denigration" involves deliberate or careless untruths, made with intent to damage another.

[Jonathan Rogers]

I know nothing about any of that, and don't wish to prompt further discussion here. I can only repeat what I said above - if there is evidence that lies were told by ECF members and were meant to cause material damage to another ECF member, then I would expect any new Code potentially to be applicable.

[Carl Hibbard]

I have no choice but to ban Paul Dupré for one week after his last post.

[Andrew Zigmond]

The problem is that I saw it. Between that and the My Story thread I am seriously considering taking up another hobby. Well not seriously but this saddens me.

[Joey Stewart]

I have no choice but to ban Paul Dupré for one week after his last post.

I assume he was banned for more then just the visible post - did you moderate something else he wrote?

[Roger de Coverly]

I assume he was banned for more then just the visible post - did you moderate something else he wrote?

There was a reference, now deleted, to one of the longer running feuds in British chess. There might have been a follow up as well.

Apart from a veteran Lancashire player, in recent history English chess has mostly been free of attempts to enforce or resolve obscure disputes through external legal processes. If you offer a "free" if unofficial process, there will be any number of takers as proved by the complaints that rolled in before the ECF suspended its scheme.

[Sean Hewitt]

In my opinion any code of conduct has to

a - apply to all involved in chess. that includes players, officials, arbiters etc
b - confine itself to serious transgressions
c - require any complainant to put up a bond to deter spurious complaints

The original CoC failed because it applied to ECF officials only and facilitated numerous complaints of the "he was rude to me" sort which were, frankly, childish. So whilst we wasted time deciding whether Director A had been rude in an email, we couldn't deal with allegations of cheating or threatening behaviour. Ridiculous.

[David Sedgwick]

In my opinion any code of conduct has to

a - apply to all involved in chess. that includes players, officials, arbiters etc
b - confine itself to serious transgressions
c - require any complainant to put up a bond to deter spurious complaints

The original CoC failed because it applied to ECF officials only and facilitated numerous complaints of the "he was rude to me" sort which were, frankly, childish. So whilst we wasted time deciding whether Director A had been rude in an email, we couldn't deal with allegations of cheating or threatening behaviour. Ridiculous.

That is why I said in my remarks at the April 2012 Council Meeting that the Board should take a look at the Code of Conduct of the English Bridge Union, which has served them well for many years.

I wouldn't claim to be an expert on it, but I think it meets most of your three points and avoids the pitfalls which you mention in your final pragraph.

I received an assurance that the then Board would consider my suggestion. Either they rejected it completely, or (more likely I think) they didn't actually consider it at all.